SB 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
BULLETIN No. 868 

Contribution from the Bureau of Biological Survey 
E. W. NELSON, Chief 



Washington, D. C. 



PROFESSIONAL PAPER 



January 10, 1921 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING 
IN THE UNITED STATES 



By 

E. R. KALMBACH and I. N. GABRIELSON 

Assistant Biologists 



CONTENTS 



Problems Raised by the Starling 1 

Sources of Information 2 

Distribution and Abundance 3 

Description 8 

Life History 9 

Economic Status In Other Countries ... 13 

Food Habits in the United States .... 15 

Animal Food of Adults 15 

Insects 15 

Millipeds 25 

Spiders 25 

MoIlus1(s 26 

Miscellaneous Animal Food . . 26 

Vegetable Food of Adults 26 

Cherries 26 

Berries 29 

Apples 29 

Pears and Peaches ....'... 30 

Grapes 30 

Corn 31 



Page 



Food Habits in the United States — Contd. 
Vegetable Food of Adults — Contd. 

Small Grain 34 

Garden Truck 34 

Wild Fruit 35 

Miscellaneous Vegetable Food . 37 

Food of Nestlings 37 

Observations from Blind .... 39 

Stomach Examination- 40 

Animal Food 41 

Vegetable Food 43 

Food Preferences at Different 

Ages 44 

Relation to Other Species of Birds ... 46 

Natural Enemies 53 

Eradica^on of Roosts 54 

Control Measures 56 

Legislation 57 

Summary of Evidence 57 

Conclusion 59 




J^^%J-U 



WASHINGTON 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1921 



N 



JAN 21 1921 

'MF.iviTS DIVISION 



^ 

r^ 



1- 



^ 
^ 
/ 



S15K3 



Bui. 868, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



PLATE I. 




PLUMAGES OF STARLINGS. 
Adult male (spring). Young in juvenal pliuuage, 

Adult female (spring). Adult, male and female (faU). 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 







.,, BULLETIN No. 868 



Contribution from the Bureau of Biological Survey, 
E. W. NELSON, Chief. 




S^?^^^u 



Washington, D. C. 



PROFESSIONAL PAPER 



January 10, 1921 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING IN THE 
UNITED STATES 

By E. R. Kalmbach and I. N. Gabkielson, Assistant Biologists. 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 

Problems raised by the starling 1 

Sources of information 2 

Distribution and abimdance 3 

Description 8 

Life history 9 

Economic status in other countries 13 

Food habits in the United States 15 

Animal food of adults 15 

Insects 15 

Millipeds 25 

Spiders 25 

MoUusks 26 

Miscellaneous animal food 26 

Vegetable food of adults 26 

Cherries 26 

Berries 29 

Apples 29 

Pears and peaches 30 

Grapes _ 30 

Com 31 



Page. 
Food habits in the United States — Continued. 
Vegetable food of adults — Continued. 

Small grain 34 

Garden track 34 

Wild fruit 35 

Miscellaneous vegetable food 37 

Food of nestlings 37 

Observations from blind 39 

f Stomach examination 40 

Animal food 41 

Vegetable food 43 

Food preferences at diflerent ages. . 44 

Relation to other species of birds 46 

Natural enemies 53 

Eradication of roosts 54 

Control measures 56 

Legislation 57 

Summary of evidence 57 

Conclusion 59 



PROBLEMS RAISED BY THE STARLING. 

MINDFITL of the disastrous results that have attended the intro- 
duction of exotic forms of wild animal life, farmers and bird 
lovers generally have looked with apprehension on the introduction 
and spread of the European starling in the United States. Wlien 
the destructive careers of such introduced forms as the brown rat, 
the house mouse, and the English sparrow are considered, not to 
mention the annual toll in millions of dollars now being paid to satisfy 
the appetites of numerous insect pests that have been unwittingly 
brought from abroad, it is not to be wondered at that the deliberate 
importation and liberation of a considerable number of another 
species of bird that has since increased enormously in numbers 
should produce discussion. 

182334°— 21 1 



2 BULLETIN 868, U, S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Criticism came first only from those who foresaw in the light of 
previous experiences what might be the result of an unhampered 
spread of the starling. For a number of years the birds were con- 
fined to a small area about the place of importation, New York City, 
and there they were of interest chiefly to ornithologists. Their 
spread, however, in the early years of this century to the neigh- 
boring suburban and farming sections of New York, New Jersey, 
and Connecticut brought them more intimately in competition with 
our native birds and in close contact with growing crops. The 
starling was heard from immediately. Reports of its aggressive 
tactics against native birds became frequent: Flicker nests were 
said to be usurped by the wholesale; the houses of bluebirds and 
wrens were sharing a similar fate; young robins were being dragged 
from their nests and killed; and the food supply of certain native 
birds was being seriously reduced by the ever-increasing flocks of 
the foreigner. From farmers, too, came criticism: Cherries, ber- 
ries, apples, and pears were reported damaged; in spring garden truck 
suffered; and in midsummer sweet corn was attacked by the birds. 
Even from the cities came complaints of the noise and filth connected 
with the large roosts of late summer and fall, established usually in a 
residential section. Few indeed had a good word to say for the new- 
comer. The occasional words of praise, however, were significant. 
Coming usually from careful observers, these appeared to indicate 
that, despite its bad points, the starling was destroying terrestrial 
insect pests at a rate surpassed by few, if any, of our native birds. 

From such conflicting testimony it was apparent that an accurate 
estimate of the starling's worth could be secured only by extensive 
field observation, supplemented by careful laboratory examination 
of the contents of a large number of stomachs collected under diverse 
conditions and representative of every month in the year. It was 
imperative that this be done in order that an intelligent attitude 
might be reflected in legislation enacted for the bird's protection or 
control. Such work the Bureau of Biological Survey began in the 
spring of 1910, and the results of its investigation are discussed in 
the following pages. 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION. 

In conducting field work it was planned to visit as many points 
in the six States in which the starling was common in 1916 as one 
season's work by two investigators would permit.^ Effort was 

1 Field work in the States of Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, as well as on Long Island, 
New York, was conducted by I. N. Gabrielson; and in I'ennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York (except 
Long Island), by E. R. Kalmbach. This involved continuous observation from the beginning of April 
to the middle of October, a period in which all forms of damage of which the starling had been accused 
could be investigated. The authors collaborated in the examination of the material collected and in the 
preparation of the manuscript. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STAELIIS^G. 3 

made to visit places from which complaints had come, and enough of 
these were investigated to give a good idea of the habits of the star- 
ling in areas where it had acquired an unfavorable reputation. 

There were secm-ed for this investigation a total of 2,466 well- 
filled stomachs, probably a greater number than has ever before 
been used for investigating the food habits of a single species of 
bird. Of these, 309 were of nestlings. Approximately two-thh'ds 
of the material was collected by representatives of the Biological 
Survey, the remainder being secured from reliable collectors, who 
at the same time submitted many economic notes of interest. Of 
these stomachs 1,250 were collected in Connecticut, 814 in New 
Jersey, 269 in New York, 62 in Pennsylvania, 43 in Massachusetts, 
27 in Rhode Island, and 1 in Delaware. Besides these there were 
gathered 160 additional stomachs only partially filled with food. 
Wliile these were not suited for estimating percentages, they fm*- 
nished considerable information concerning food items. " 

In response to a chcular letter sent under date of June 15, 1915, to 
nmnerous bhd students, horticultm'ists, and practical farmers, 269 
replies were received. The follomng questions, embodied in that 
circular, will give an idea of the data obtained: 

1. About what year did the starling appear in yoiir neighborhood? 

2. Is it now common? When did it become so? Abundance as compared with 
other species. 

3. Is the bird destructive to fruits? State kmds and, if possible, the approximate 
amount of damage. 

4. Does the starling damage any other crops or property? 

5. What are the relations of the starling to other Inrds? 

6. Where plenty of nest boxes have l;)een placed, has friction between the starling 
and other species decreased? 

7. At what time of year do starlings begin to flock? Are they more destnictive 
when in flocks than at other times? 

8. Does the starling spend the winter in your locality? 

9. FrcMn your ol^servations do you consider the starling injurious or beneficial? 

Besides the replies to these requests, correspondence from other 
sources has yielded many facts that have been incorporated in tliis 
bulletin. 

DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF THE STARLING. ^ 

The starling {Sturnus vulgaris) is native to all l)ut the most north- 
ern parts of Europe, and also occupies the same latitudes in the 
western two-thu-ds of Siberia. Migration in fall takes the bulk of 
the species to countries bordering on the Mediterranean, and a 
portion to the warm latitudes as far east as Hindustan. Several 
related species and su])species of starlings occupy adjacent sections 
and even portions of the same areas in the southeastern part of tliis 

2 Most of the data here presented concerning the introduction and spread of the starling in the United 
States prior to 1916 have been compiled by W. L. McAtee, of the Bureau of Biological Survey. 



4 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

range. The starling lias been introduced and established as an inte- 
gi'al part of the fauna of Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand, South 
Africa, and the United States. 

In North America attempts have been made to establish it at Cin- 
cinnati, Ohio (1872, 1873); Quebec, Canada (1875); Central Park, 
New York City (1877, 1887, 1890, 1891); Portland, Oreg. (1889, 
1892); Allegheny, Pa. (1897); Springfield, Mass. (1897); Bay Kidge, 
N. y. ; and a few other localities. The bird gained a foothold at 
Portland, but now is scarce or extinct in that vicinity. Apparently 
the introductions of 1890 and 1891 into Central Park, New York 
City, are the ones which resulted in the permanent establishment of 
the species, and from this colony have been derived the thousands 
of birds now scattered over the northeastern ITnited States. 

The starling has not spread \vith the rapidity characterizing the 
English sparrow's occupation of the country. One reason is that 
this bird apparently does not travel in box cars; another, that it 
has not been introduced into so many localities nor carried from 
place to place by man. Nevertheless, it has steadily "wddened its 
breeding range and each year performs more and more extensive 
migrations. 

For six years after its fii'st successful introduction into Central Park 
the starling did not breed beyond the limits of greater New York. 
In 1896 it was confined as a breeding species to New York City, 
Brooklyn, and Staten Island. By 1902 it had reached Norwalk, 
Conn., and Ossining, N. Y., on the north; and Bayonne, N. J., on the 
south. By 1906, territory as far north as Wethersfield, Conn., and 
as far southwest as Trevose, Pa., was occupied. In 1908, Providence, 
R. I., and Philadelphia marked the extremes of its breeding range; 
and by 1913, Hadley, Mass., and Westchester, Pa., had been reached. 
The bu'd bred not far from Washington, D. C, in the summer of 1916 
and in the same season was found breeding as far north as the south- 
ern boundaries of New Hampsliii-e and Vermont, while toward the 
northwest it had extended its breeding range as far as Oneida County, 
N. Y. (see map, fig. 1). In its post-breeding wanderings the. starling 
has been recorded from a much greater area, extending in 1916 from 
southern Maine to Norfolk, Va. On November 10, 1917, one speci- 
men was collected as far south as Savannah, Ga. Inland it has been 
seen at Rochester, N. Y., Wheeling, W. Va., and in east central Ohio. 

As a breeder the starling is by no means uniformly distributed 
thi-oughout its range. In the first place, it is decidedly partial to 
thickly settled agricultm'al sections. It shows also a preference for 
the vicinity of the coast and the larger river valleys-, and in its spread 
over the country lowlands are populated first. In the strip of terri- 
tory from New York City to New Haven, Conn., where the starling 
in 1916 seemed to be the most abundant breeding bii-d, it was con- 



ECONOMIC VALXTE OF THE STARLING. 



fined to a narrow belt of low, flat, or rolling farm land within 8 or 
10 miles of salt water, and, ^^'itll tlie exception of the Housatonic 




Fig. 1.— Breeding range of the starling at various periods from 1896 to 1916. Since 1916 this range has 
been extended so little that it is not indicated on the map . 

Valley, there were few bhds inland. East of New Haven the 
starling was restricted mainly to the shore. In most of the Con- 



U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

necticiit River valley below Middletown, where it is narrow, with 
wild, rough land reacliing often to the water's edge, the starling 
was scarce; but north of Middletown, where the valley widens until 
several miles of rich cultivated bottom land lie between the wooded 
hills, the bii'd was very abundant. Up the river as far north as 
Springfield, Mass., the starling was as common a breeder as the 
robin. North of Springfield it was not present in great numbers, 
although favorable conditions for food and nest sites prevailed. 
According to a count made in 1916 by the bird club of Springfield, 
that city contained a breeding starling population of 5,000. Amherst, 
Holyoke, Northampton, and Greenfield, Mass., had colonies of var}^- 
ing sizes, those of Amherst and Greenfield approximating 1,000 and 
500, respectively. In eastern Massachusetts and in Rhode Island 
the bu'ds were only local in distribution. On Long Island a line 
drawn from Oyster Bay on the north to Bay Shore on the south 
roughly marked the eastern boundary of the region of abundance. 
East of this line the bu'ds were generally, but not abundantly, dis- 
tributed on the north and south shores. They were absent from the 
center of the island except for a few in cultivated clearings. 

In 1916, the starling was extremely abundant in northeastern New 
Jersey, where it had been established about the cities of Newark, 
Paterson, Montclair, Elizabeth, and Plainfield for at least 15 years. 
It was also quite generally distributed throughout Somerset, Middle- 
sex, Hunterdon, and Mercer Counties. In the northern parts of 
Monmouth, Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties it was 
locally abundant. There were very few, however, in the pine barrens 
in the southeastern part of the State, or in the hilly sections to the 
north, comprising all of Sussex and Warren Counties and parts of 
Morris, Passaic, and Bergen Counties. Up the Hudson the starling's 
abundance was restricted to the vicinity of the larger towns, Peeks- 
kUl, Newburgh, and Poughkeepsie having the greatest numbers. 
The narrowness of the valley prevented a general distribution along 
the lower Hudson. In Peimsylvania the bulk of the starling popu- 
lation was stiU confined to the vicinity of Philadelphia. 

The familiarity of the starling with human abodes, and the daily 
visits to a single feeding ground of the same post-breeding flock are 
the two factors that have given many persons an exaggerated idea of 
the abundance of the species. Few have attempted to estimate relative 
numbers during the breeding season. It is believed that in aU of Hud- 
son County, most of Essex and Union Counties, and the southeastern 
and southern parts, respectively, of Passaic and Bergen Counties, 
New Jersey, the starling in 1916 had reached a state of maximum 
abundance, beyond which it wiU not increase as a breeder. The same 
may be said of the area immediately to the east and northeast of 
Brooklyn and New York City and extending along the Connecticut 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 7 

shore as far as Bridgeport. It is possible, of course, for the size of 
post-breeding roosts and winter flocks to be further augmented in 
this section by an increased breeding population in adjacent country. 
Taking this area as a whole, the starling about equaled the English 
sparrow as a breeder. In the residential sections of some of the cities 
it outnumbered the sparrow, but it in turn was greatly outnumbered 
about the freight yards, markets, business streets, and dumping 
grounds ; and even in many of the rural sections the sparrow predomi- 
nated. 

Beyond this area of maximum abundance, centers of starling 
population, where the starling as much as equaled the English spar- 
row as a breeder, were quite restricted and often isolated from other 
colonies by many miles. Consequently, exaggerated ideas regarding 
the average abundance of the starling throughout its range were also 
held by persons living in the vicinity of localized colonies. A dis- 
tance of but a few miles mil at times reveal great difl'erences in star- 
ling abundance. At BernardsviUe, N. J. (July 22-25), starlings were 
too scaj'ce to make collecting profitable, although at Mendliam, only 
6 miles to the north, the brood of the year was so abundant about 
the farms close to the village that the bhds infhcted severe damage 
to the cheriy crop. At Somerville, N. J. (June 5-8), only 10 miles 
from Plainfield, a center of starling population, the same unfavorable 
collecting conditions were met. At Freehold, N. J. (September 18- 
October 1), the location of a roost in the town accounted for an 
unusual abundance of starlings on the near-by farms, especially in 
early morning and late afternoon. After the roost had been eradi- 
cated, the starling could not be placed any higher than tenth in a 
list of birds of the surrounding country, arranged accorcUng to their 
abundance. 

In 1916, there was a vast area along the borders of the starling's 
range where the bird was too scarce to be of any great economic sig- 
nificance. This applied to most of Massachusetts and Rhode Island; 
New York, north and west of Kingston ; Pemisylvania and Delaware, 
outside of a 30-mile radius of Philadelphia; and New Jersey, south 
of a line drawn from Salem to Toms River. In this region many 
farmers were wholly unacquainted with the bird and very few had 
complaints to make. 

With a knowledge of the starling's habitat and food preferences, 
both in Europe and in this country, and of the bird's ability to adapt 
itself to new environment, some conjecture may be ventured as to 
its ultimate distribution in the United States. Until 1916, the 
Allegheny Mountains appeared to be an effective barrier against 
progress to the west, but now that numbers have been reported at 
points west of the divide, the spread through the low, fertile farmland 
of Ohio and Indiana may be rapid. There appears no reason why 



8 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

the starling, once established in the Mississippi Valley, should not 
readily extend its range as far north as the middle of Michigan, Wis- 
consin, and Minnesota. To the south, it will probably go nearly, if 
not actually, to the Gulf coast, though it may always be scarce as a 
breeder in the southern part of this area. To the west, the Great 
Plains with their scarcity of suitable nesting sites, and back of them 
the Rocky Mountains with their high altitudes, w^ill bar the starling 
for many years from reachnig the Great Basin or California by either 
a northern or a southern route. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE STARLING. 

Even in areas where the starling has been long established uncer- 
tainty exists as to its identification. Post-breeding flocks of red- 
winged blackbirds are often called starlings, and the damage they 
do is often attributed to the latter. The great difl'erences between 
the plumages of the young and of the adults, as well as the great 
change in the appearance of the old birds from fall to spring, also lead 
to confusion. The starling, howeverj bears several conspicuous 
marks of identification, and when these are borne in mind, one will 
have little trouble in recognizing the bird. 

The adult starling is about 8| inches long, and its weight is about 
equal to that of the robin; but its short, drooping tail gives it, when 
at rest, a chunky, humpbacked appearance. From early spring 
until the middle of June the adult bird may be singled out at a dis- 
tance by its being our only black bird having a rather long, sharp, 
yellow bill. In the male the base of the lower mandible is somewhat 
darkened with livid; in the female these parts are simply paler yellow. 
After the breeding season, and coincident with the molt, the entire 
bill darkens until it is nearly black. The molt is usually completed 
by the middle of September and leaves the starling a much changed 
bird. The feathers of the sides of the head, breast, flanks, and under- 
parts have white tips, so that from a distance the bird has a gray, 
mottled appearance. At close range, however, the starling is a 
handsome bird in this plumage ; the dark parts of the feathers of the 
throat, breast, and flanks are resplendent with iridescent reflec- 
tions of purple, green, and blue; while on the back, with its green 
and bronze iridescence, the feathers are tipped with brown. The 
tail and wings are dark, some of the feathers of the latter being edged 
with brown. During winter most of the white tips to the feathers 
on the breast and underparts wear oft, leaving the bird dark below, 
with the iridescent reflections stiU present. (See frontispiece.) 

On leaving the nest the young are a uniform dark olive-brown on 
the back, and below they are at first somewhat streaked with lighter 
markings, but soon become unicolor; the throat is white or buffy. 
The first molt begins about the same time as that of the adults. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE .STARLING. 9 

The first new feathers appear on the sides of the breast, the flanks, 
and the center of the back, while the plumage of the head is the last 
to change. During July, August, and early September, young birds 
in all stages of the molt may be found. When the plumage has 
completely changed the young can not with certainty be cUstin- 
guished from the adults, although they tend to have larger white 
tips to the feathers below. 

In flight the starlmg may be confused with a few other species. 
From its habit of sailmg on fixed wings for considerable distances 
it is often mistaken for the purple martin, but a little watching will 
reveal the starling's greater speed. When m flocks starlings may 
be distinguished from other gregarious species with which they often 
associate by the v/onderful coordination of action between the in- 
dividuals of the flock, their rapid whig beats, gi'eat speed, and ability 
to alter direction instantly. 

In searchmg for food the starlmg walks rather rapidly and with 
little change in pace, keeping up a conthiuous zigzag course when 
on grassland, seldom hesitating unless to pick up food. 

The contention of many bird lovers that the starling's lack of song 
is a good reason for not allowmg it to supplant native songsters is open 
to controversy. While its notes, outside of a clear whistle or two 
and a coarse rasping note of alarm, are subdued and lack melody, 
should one chance to be close to a male starlmg putting forth his 
best efforts, the results will be as fascinatmg as the more celebrated 
whisper songs of the catbird or of the brown thrasher. The starlmg 
is a mimic par excellence and has the notes of a number of our 
native birds already in its repertohe, a fact that has oftfen led to 
error in identification when the observer placed too much confi- 
dence in notes alone. Perhaps the bird most frequently imitated 
is the wood pewee, whose plaintive "pee-a-wee" is reproduced 
with such delicate skill that it can not be distmguished from the 
song of the woodland flycatcher itself. The mellow tones of the 
bluebird's call are given with almost equal fineness. In areas where 
the bob-white is common its two-noted whistle is readily taken up 
by the starling and executed in a way that closely resembles the 
orighiaL Notes of the red-winged blackbnd, gracl^e, field sparrow, 
flicker, blue jay, Carolma wren, and English sparrow also are given, 
but less frequently. Young starlings have a harsh, hissing, or rasping 
note, which seems to have its origin as a feedmg call, but is given for 
some time after leavmg the nest. 

LIFE HISTORY. 

During the first week in April the wintering flocks of starlings 
begin to decrease in numbers as the birds mate an<l wander ofi in 
182334°— 21 2 



10 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

search of nesting sites. By the middle of the month this process is 
completed, although the birds often return to the old roosts for the 
night until nqst building is started. 

For nesting sites, old woodpecker holes, natural cavities in trees, 
bird houses (particularly those intended for bluebirds, flickers, and 
martins), and cornices or crevices about buildings are most frequently 
chosen, although nests have been, found on fire escapes, hay tracks, 
and barn doors, behind wmdow shutters, and even in open boxes 
erected for pigeons. In fact, any cavity, regardless of size of opening 
or depth, may be utilized if the starling is able to enter it at all. 
The nesting sites chosen are frequently poorh^ protected from rain; 
consequently the nests are foul and damp. 

In the mere construction and occupancy of their nests, starlings 
have been the source of some complamt. Bemg sturdy bh-ds and 
equipped with bills well suited for tearing things to pieces, though 
not especially adapted to chiselmg healthy wood, they will at times 
do damage to roofs not recently shmgled. The cloggmg of hay 
tracks or tracks of barn doors with their nests is occasionally a 
source of trouble, and the infesting of the immediate vicinity of 
their homes with bird lice is complained of when they build about 
water tanks, poultry houses, etc. The filthiness of their nests, due 
to the great quantity of excreta deposited, is also a common com- 
plaint, especially when the birds choose some spot immediately 
above the doorstep for their breeding operations. This condition 
prevails most often during the latter stages of the nestlmg life, when 
the parent birds are unable to remove all the accumulation. 

The hejght at which starlmgs nest is variable, the lowest nest cavity 
observed being 2 feet from the ground and the highest fully 40 feet. 
When they nest m trees the cavities usually range from 10 to 25 
feet from the ground. 

The nest itself is usually composed almost entirely of dry grasses 
and is sufficiently large to fill the bottom of a cavity 3 to 4 inches 
deep. The interior of the nest wUl approximate 3 inches in diameter. 
A little green foliage, usually a few leaves taken from a near-by 
branch, is dispersed throughout the grassy structure. The interior 
is lined sparingly with feathers of domestic fowls-s Straw, corn 
husks, strmg, and cloth are other materials sometimes used in nest 
building. Nestmg sites used for several years in succession gradu- 
ally fill up with a partly decayed mass of these materials. From one 
nest m the cornice of a sawmill a good half bushel of material was 
removed. 

The eggs are of a pale-blue color and number from 3 to 6 to the set. 
Incubation lasts about 12 days. The young remain in the nest 
from 2 to 3 weeks, or until they are able to fly, which they do well 
on their first attempt. This habit, combined with the protected nest 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 11 

sites, tends to reduce the mortality among young starlings much 
below that of many other species. 

Nestlmg starlings are fed by the parents largely on insects. For 
the first week both parents take part in the feeding operations, but 
m several nests that were under obsei-vation the female was left to do 
all the work during the later 2)art of the nestlmg period. When 
3 or 4 days old the young are very noisy and give the feeding call in 
lusty chorus m response to almost any somid. Later, they learn to 
distmguish the approach of the parents and respond only to their 
notes or appearance. Other noises or vibrations cause them to 
crouch sUently m the bottom of the nest, and no amount of coaxmg 
will i^ersuade one of them to stir or make a somid. 

Two broods are usually raised each year and sometimes there 
are three. The first of these leaves the nest about June 1 and the 
second late in July. Fledglmgs which may have been from either 
a belated second or third brood just from the nest were collected as 
late as September 12, at Bay Shore, N. Y. 

As soon as the first brood leaves the nest small flocks of yomig 
starlmgs can be found feeding on grasslands or roosting at night m 
trees or buildmgs. These flocks grow rapidly in size and by mid- 
July often number mto the thousands. During the day no adult 
birds are found in these early flocks and very few appear until after 
the completion of the molt m September; both old and young, how- 
ever, occupy the same nightly roost. These post-breeduig flocks 
usually select a roosting place m trees in the residential sections of 
cities and are there the cause of much complaint. Occasionally a 
roost will be formed in a cat-tail marsh or m a bufldmg, but this is 
the exception rather than the rule. 

At a roost in a marsh along the Hackensack River an opportunity 
was afforded to v/atch the starlmgs congregathig. As early as 3 
o'clock in the afternoon flocks of a dozen or two could be found 
gathermg in the hayfields in the vichiity, or i^erchmg on dead chest- 
nuts, smgmg and preening theh- feathers. Most of these were 
juvenfles with the molt extendmg up as far as the neck. They 
would fly alternately to the hay stubble, which was heavily mfested 
with grasshoppers, and then to the tree tops when flushed. By 4 
o'clock a flock of a hmidred or more had gathered. In the scramble 
for grasshoppers and crickets, one or more momentary conflicts 
between competitors would b§ almost continuously in progress and, 
as the flock progressed across the fleld, a rollmg aspect was imparted 
to it as birds in the rear would fly forward to new territory. 

With the approach of evening the bu'ds would rise and perform 
numerous flight evolutions, m which they displayed wonderful 
coordination of action. This was best observed when they would 
fly in the direction of the smi, and the flashes of light coming from 



12 BULLETIN 8G8, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

their glossy backs api)eared as coming from a single mirror instead 
of from several hundred bodies acting independently but in perfect 
unison. After a muiute or two of such flight the flock would some- 
times seem suddenly to lose this ability of coordinated action and the 
individuals would spread out in a long wavermg Ime, breaking up 
into several groups before alightmg. As dusk approached, the birds 
had worked their way toward the Ilackensack River, where they 
gathered in compact flocks, singing m the tree tops along the bank. 
(PI. II.) A few v/ere seen feeding with a large niim})er of red-wmgs 
on the tidal flats along the edge of the marsh. When darkness 
finally came the starlmgs in the tree tops sailed out over the marsh 
and jomed then relatives, perching on the cat-tail flags for the night. 

The behavior of starlings at all other roosts which came under 
observation was much the same, except in one instance, at Glenn 
Cove, N. Y. Here the birds went tln-ough the usual maneuvers and 
settled in company with a great number of grackles in a grove on the 
outsldrts of town. Late in the evening the entire flock rose in a 
body and flew to the permanent roost half a mile or more away, 
behaving much the same as do crows in gathering at a winter roost. 

These summer roosts are often inhabited by several species. 
Grackles or starlings usually form the bulk of the occupants, but 
there may be also numbers of cowbirds, red-winged blackbirds, 
English sparrows, and robins. An unusual roost was established at 
Washington, D. C, in August, 1917. At a point on the Mall, where 
grackles had roosted for years and starlings had been found for several 
seasons, a great mixed flock congregated, consisting of 8,000 or more 
purple martins, about 1,000 grackles, 300 starlings, and a few swallows 
(probably rough- winged swallows). 

The birds from these summer roosts frequently have a definite 
feeding route. For example, the starlings from the Glenn Cove roost 
flew south and east for about a mile to commence feeding, and from 
5 to 7 o'clock each morning could be found in almost the same 
locality — an abandoned field. From here they worked in a well-de- 
fined circle, appearing at 4 o'clock in the afternoon in an orchard 
three-quarters of a mile north of the roost and feeding there and in the 
surrounding fields until going to the trees for the night. 

In October or November the starlings voluntarily abandon these 
tree roosts and resort to church towers, barns, or other buildings for 
shelter. Here they gather nightly until spring, when the flocks are 
broken up by the mating impulse. A local estimate of the number 
of birds in such a roost in a church tower in Norwalk, Conn., varied 
from 10,000 to "a miflion," but an approximate count revealed the 
fact that not more than 1,000 birds were roosting there in April, 1916. 

Although the starling remains in some numbers throughout the 
]n*eeding range during the winter, it exhibits a certain migratory' 



Bui. 868, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate II. 



























^mM 


r. 
^ 


'^ 




N 


^\rf/ 




J 


" 


'<^^ 


'^mJL I 


i 


u 




\''^ 


•If /v 


/ 


>^ 


1 


"V"' 


w^ 


.— ■ 


s> 




\ ■' • ^-^ 


W /^ng^j?^ 


■Mi 


^^^ 


...x. 

^ 


^fe5iijS&« 


m^^ 







Starlings at Hackensack, N J., Roost. 

Photograph taken at about .';undo\vn while most of the birds were singing. A few moments 
later these starlings, along with luindreds of others, sailed out over a near-by marsh, where 
they roosted among cat-tails in company with many red-winged blackbirds. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 13 

movement. All the birds in one locality collect into a single roost, 
hut in addition to this there is a large increase in the flocks along the 
scacoast and a considerable movement southward from the breed- 
ing area. For tlu'ee years a varying number of starlings appeared 
in a fall roost in Washington, D. C, before breeding birds were first 
found in 1917. Other localities south of the breeding range have 
also reported wintering flocks for several years before the birds 
have become permanent residents. 

ECONOMIC STATUS IN OTHER COUNTRIES.^' 

While the behavior of the starling in its native home and in coun- 
tries to wliich it has been introduced can not be interpreted as a 
certain indication of its conduct under the new conditions it will 
meet in tliis country, its activities elsewhere will serve to call atten- 
tion to its capabilities for doing good or harm. Tliroughout most 
of its breeding range in Europe, partic.ularly in France, Germany, and 
Hungary, the bird is held in great esteem and is encouraged, by the 
erection of nest -boxes, to breed about farms and gardens. 

The chief German authorities, with one exception, have considered 
the starling more beneficial than injurious. The birds there do consid- 
erable damage to grapes and cherries, and to a smaller extent injure 
various cultivated berries. On the other hand, they feed freely upon 
injurious snails and slugs, beetle larvae, caterpillars, maggots, and grass- 
hoppers. Among their prey are such pests as ticks, gadflies, stable flies, 
cockchafers, fern beetles, pine weevils, fir weevils, spruce moths, and 
field and mole crickets. 

French authors mention damage by the starling to olives and 
grapes, but are unanimous in declaring the species useful. It is 
significant, moreover, that, although one of their articles was pub- 
lished in a viticultural journal, damage to grapes, one of the greatest 
points made against the starling, was not considered sufficient to 
exclude the bird from the list of useful species. 

In Belgium the starling is said to be very useful and its damage in- 
significant, as it prefers an insect diet. It eats about the same pests 
as in Germany, and in addition wireworms, grass moths, plant lice, 
and oak leaf-rollers. 

The late Otto Herman, distinguished Hungarian ornithologist, 
asserts * that, taking its feeding habits of the whole year into consid- 
eration, the starling does a thousand times more good than harm and 
richly deserves protection. Starlings have rendered particularly 
efficient service during locust plagues in Hungary. 

The single Swiss author consulted gives the bird about as much 
adverse criticism as praise; and a communication from Tunis states 

3 The data presented under this topic were compiled by W. L. McAtee, of the Biological Survey. 
* Herman, Otto, Nutzen und Schaden der Vogel, Leipzig, p. 181, 1903. 



14 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

that on isolated plantations migrating starlings sometimes take the 
entire olive crop. 

In 13 of 18 general articles on the starling in Great Britain it 
is stated that the bird is more beneficial than injurious; one article 
says that while the bird is valuable now, its habits are undergoing 
a change for the worse, and four state that although very useful in 
grasslands and forests, the starling is entirely too numerous for the 
best interests of fruit growers. Exhaustive investigations of the 
bird's habits have been made by Gilmour, Newstead, Collinge, and 
the national board of agriculture. After reviewing the whole question 
of the starling's economic status the board of agriculture concludes ^ 
that "on the whole * * * the information at present collected 
goes to show that, in view of their great partiality for insect food, 
starlings are, from the forest standpoint, entirely useful, whilst in 
agriculture and gardening their usefulness far more than outweighs 
the occasional harm done." 

Summing up, it may be said that in Europe the verdict on the star- 
ling is distinctly favorable; of 35 works dealing in a general way with 
the economic status of the bird, only 7 report adversely. It is note- 
worthy, moreover, that the findings of all the thorough and more 
scientific investigators have been in favor of the species, although 
some authors admit that at present starlings are too numerous in 
some localities. 

In most countries where the bird has been introduced, the case is 
different. In Australia and Tasmania testimony concerning starlings 
is generally unfavorable. Their great faults are driving away native 
birds and preying upon fruits. They have by no means lost their 
insectivorous tastes in their new home; in fact, they are credited 
with suppressing plagues of grubs and crickets which destroy grain 
and grass. Their numbers have become so great, however, that after 
the breeding season enormous flocks band together and at times 
descend upon orchards, vineyards, or gardens, where they make 
great havoc with the crops. 

The introduction of the starling into New Zealand does not seem 
to have resulted so unfavorably as in Australia. In 1907, just 40 
years after the first importation, James Drummond published an 
account of the activities of the species in that country^** His con- 
clusions were based on the testimony submitted by many farmers who 
had experience with the birds, and were to the effect that the starling 
was one of the most valuable of insectivorous birds. 

* Board Agr. and Fisheries (London), Leaflet 4.5, Rev. ed., 4 p., June, 1905. 
8 New Zealand Dept. Agr., Div. Biol, and Hort., Bull. 16, 1907. 



•ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 15 

FOOD HABITS IN THE UNITED STATES.^ 

Examination of 2,157 stomachs of adult starlings^ showed that 57 
per cent of the annual food was animal and 43 per cent vegetable. 
During the months from April to November, inclusive, excepting 
July, animal matter made up more than half the food, the maximum 
being taken in April and May (91.22 per cent and 94.95 per cent, 
respectively). In July, with the great abundance of mulberries and 
cherries offering an unlimited supply of luscious fruit, of the 52.67 
per cent vegetable matter taken, nearly all, or 50.74 per cent of the 
total, consisted of these two items. In February, animal food 
dropped to the lowest point in the year, 28.17 per cent. The average, 
however, for the four winter months from December to March was 
31.5 per cent, a remarkable showing when circumstances are consid- 
ered. The great majority of these winter stomachs were collected in 
New Jersey and Connecticut, and in view of the usual climatic condi- 
tions in these two States it seems noteworthy that starlings were able 
to secure such a relatively high proportion of animal food. 

ANIMAL FOOD OF ADULTS. 

INSECTS. 

Of the total yearly food of the adult starling, 41.55 per cent is 
composed of insects, a greater proportion than is shown in the food 
of most of our native birds of similar habits. The monthly per- 
centages of insect food are as follows: January, 27.66; February, 
23.81; March, 23.87; April, 32.61; May, 49.94; June, 52.26; July, 
41.98; August, 56.92; September, 52.83; October, 57.8; November, 
54.0; December, 25.2. 

During winter many hibernating insects or the bodies of dead insects 
which have been preserved by the season's cold are eaten. Among 
these, beetles, weevils, stinkbugs, grasshoppers, caterpillars, and 
lepidopterous pupse are conspicuous. As the fields become more 
thoroughly gleaned the percentage of insects eaten decreases, until 
in February and March it reaches its minimum, 23.81 per cent and 
23.87 per cent, respectively. In April, as insects begin to appear in 
numbers, the percentage rises, and during the months from May to 
November, except in July, when the starling temporarily abandons 
an insect diet to feast on wild fruit, over half the total food is insects. 

As the character of the insect food of a bird is of vast importance 
in fixing its economic status, the different groups of insects in the 
food of the starling will be taken up in the order of their importance. 

' Graphic summaries of the food habits of adult and young starlings are presented in figures 2 and 3 (p. 38 
and p. 45, respectively); and the relative proportions of the various food elements are set forth in percentages 
in Tables II and III (p. 39 and p. 44 ^respectively). 

*" Included with the stomachs of the adult birds here discussed are stomachs of juvenile birds that had 
left the nest and were shifting for themselves. 



16 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGETCr^TURE. 

It must be remembered that in ascertaining the economic worth of a 
bird not all the insects eaten can be placed to its credit, as many are 
of great value because of their predacious or parasitic habits. 

CoLEOPTERA (Beetles). 

Of the 41.55 per cent of insect food consumed by the starling, 
nearly half (19.59 per cent) consists of beetles. These are divided 
among numerous families, but weevils, carabids, and scarabseids, in 
the order named, are of the greatest importance. 

The Rhynchophora, or weevils, stand first among the Coleoptera 
in the proportion of food furnished, 8.5 per cent of the starling's 
food being from tliis som-ce. In feeding on this group the starling 
is doing a very useful work, as the snout beetles include some of 
the most destructive insects with which man has to deal. Weevils 
are eaten every month in the year. The smallest quantity taken in 
any one month was 3.13 per cent in October, and the largest, 20.16 
per cent in a winter month, February. An examination of the 
monthly percentage table (p. 39) shows that there are two periods 
of the year in which weevils form over 10 per cent of the food.. The 
first is in July (13.36 per cent) and August (10.91), when many 
species are emerging; and the second is in January (14.10) and Feb- 
ruary (20.16), when the starlings are feeding on hibernating forms. 

One of the most interesting food habits of the starling is in its rela- 
tion to the clover leaf weevil (Hypera punctata), a European insect 
wliich has long been introduced and acclimated in the United States 
and wliich does serious damage to the clover crop in some seasons. It 
is known that the starling habitually feeds on tliis insect in England, 
but it apparently goes far beyond its normal liabit in feeding on it 
in this country. Nearly half (1,125) of the 2,301 adult birds exam- 
ined had eaten clover leaf weevils, and 12 had taken their larvae. 
Of these no less than 54 had taken 10 or more weevils for one meal 
and 106 had taken from 5 to 10 weevils. The largest number of 
larv8e eaten was 49, taken by a bird collected in New Jersey in May. 
These formed 38 per cent of the stomach contents. Twenty-six 
was the greatest number of adults from one stomach, and these, 
together with 6 other weevils, formed 95 per cent of the food. In 
February, 288 of the 398 stomachs examined contained remains of 
this beetle, and in January, 33 of 84. In July, 211 of 375 birds and 
in August, 216 of 347 had taken tliis weevil. 

In every month of the year the starling is searcliing the grasslands 
and weed patches for the clover leaf weevil. The liigh percentage 
revealed in January and February would seem to indicate that 
Hypera p>unctata hibernates in far greater numbers than has been 
commonly believed, for it is scarcely conceivable that so many dead 
insects would be left in as good condition as are many of these this 



Bui. 868, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 






Plate III. 


4 h i ^ 


> 


u 


*^ ^mbISH^S^hSw- 


1^ ij 1* ii 


iit 


9 


«»■• 


•J id *t *■ 


•* 


|4 




% »* 









Fig. I.— Stomach Contents of Juvenile Starling. 

Nearly 95 per cent of this bird's food consisted of tlie remains of 26 clover-leaf weevils, the heads, 
thoraces, and wing covers of which may be seen at the left of the picture. The large mass in 
the upper right-hand corner is ad.ditiohal debris of the same insects; below it are parts of a 
clover-root weevil; and in the lower right-hand corner are fragments of the skin of a cultivated 
cherrj. 



» » » 1 1 $ III 


i)\^n>^\ ) 


>ll%l%l»l 


^ ) S/» !> t^^ 


1 IIIMIIl 




II 1 « 1 1 1 II 


1 1 1 • 1 t t 1 « 


% |»|«t»i« 


t^tKi S'-^U 4 






• #'«%««•'■ 


t til i t 1 « « 


^ %^ x ^ ^ ^ i » "^ 


» N . ^ ^ 


^y^iy ^ 



Fig. 2.— Stomach Contents of Juvenile Starling. 

Except for a few bits of vegetable rubbish, shown in the extreme lower right-hand corner of the 
picture, all of this bird's food consisted of flies in one stage or another of development. There 
were present 1 adult and 76 puparia of Muscidae, at least 85 sarcophagid larvae, and another 
puparium. This bird apparently had been feeding in the vicinity of carrion or garbage. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 17 

late in winter. For example, one bird from Massachusetts in 
January had eaten 14 of these weevils and 4 others, wliich made a 
total of 26 per cent of its food. A Connecticut bird taken in the 
same month had also eaten 14 of these weevils, wliich formed 32 
per cent of the food. In these two months 14 of the birds had taken 
more than 5 Hypera at a single meal. (PI. Ill, fig. 1.) 

Another weevil eaten in considerable numbers is the lesser clover 
leaf weevil (Phytonomus nigrirostris) . Seventy-thi-ee of the 2,301 
adult birds had fed on this insect. The greatest number taken was 
9 by each of 2 birds. The clover root curculio (Sitona Tiispidula), 
the larvae of which feed on the roots of various species of clover, is 
also a favorite article of diet, having been taken by 505 adult star- 
lings. It was foimd most abundantly in the same months as the 
clover leaf weevil, as 27 of 84 birds taken in January, 119 of 398 
taken in February, 83 of 375 in July, and 86 of 347 in August had 
eaten it. The birds frequently took numbers of this species, 36 
having taken 5 or more. An August bird from Pennsylvania had 
eaten 30 adult clover root curculios, and one from New Jersey had 
taken 31. The closely related weevil Sitona Jiavesctns, which has 
similar injm-ious habits, is preyed upon to a less extent, only 33 of the 
2,301 adults having eaten it. One of these, however, taken in 
Connecticut during August, had devoured 17 of the weevils, and 
several others had taken 2 or more. 

The strawberry crown girdler (Qtiorhynclius ovatus), the larvas of 
which feed on the roots of strawberries and other plants, had been 
eaten by 60 adult starlings, and the closely related weevil (Otiorliyn- 
cJhUS sulcatus) known in Em-ope as the black-vine weevil, had been 
taken 7 times, Barypeithes pellucidus, another weevil known to 
attack strawberries and found in southern New England and adja- 
cent States, had been taken by a single bird, which had made 75 per 
cent of its meal on 167 individuals. 

In point of numbers taken, SpTieTwpliorus, a group of destructive 
weevils known as billbugs, which bore into the seeds and stems of 
grain, stands next to the clover weevils, as at least 225 starlings 
had eaten them. Of these the "bluegrass billbug" {S. parvulus), 
which had been eaten by 104 birds, was most frequently taken. 
These insects sometimes do considerable damage to timothy. Five 
other species of this genus, all of them injurious, were taken in 
varying numbers by the bu-ds. Phyxelis rigidus was found in 90 
stomachs, one of which contained 13 individuals. 

As the starling stomachs examined often contained several species 

of these injurious weevils, a few of the more interesting ones are 

mentioned here. In a July stomach from Pennsylvania 20 Hypera 

punctata^ 14 Sitona hispidula, and 2 Sphenopliorus sp. formed 95 

182334°— 21 3 



18 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

per cent of the contents, A New Jersey bird taken in the same month 
had made 60 per cent of its meal on weevils, as follows: 3 Hypera 
•punctata, 9 Sitona Mspidula, 1 Sitonafiavescens, 1 PJiytonomus nigri- 
wstris, 1 SpJienophorus parvalus, and fragments of one other weevil. 
An August bird taken in Connecticut had eaten 13 Hypera punctata, 
3 PJiytonomus nigrirostris, and 1 other weevil, making of these 72 
per cent of its meal. Another bird from the same State collected 
in January had eaten 9 Hypera punctata, 2 Sitona Mspidula, and 3 
Splienopliorus parvulus, which formed 50 per cent of the total 
stomach contents. 

From the foregoing data it is evident that the starlmg is a very 
effective enemy of such weevils as feed on grass or forage crops. 
This is particularly noticeable in regard to the clover pests, and it 
is safe to assert that the starling is the most effective hird enemy of the 
clover weevil in America. 

It seems natural that the Carabidse, or ground beetles, being to a 
large extent grass-inhabiting forms, should be present in the star- 
ling's food, of which they constitute 5.71 per cent. As this famil}^ 
contains both beneficial and injurious insects it will be necessary to 
consider it in some detail. During the months from April to October, 
inclusive, carabids furnish a considerable portion of the food, varying 
from 4.56 per cent in October to 13.02 in August. They are among 
the first beetles to appear in spring, and are promptly sought for 
by the starling. This is strikingly shown by their increase in the 
food from 1.07 per cent in March to 7.31 per cent in April. The maxi- 
mum consumption of these insects is in August and September (13.02 
per cent and 12.93 per cent, respectively, of the food). During the 
other months the number taken is small and in no case forms much 
more than 1 per cent. 

Inasmuch as ground beetles seldom occur in nature in as great 
numbers as some of the plant-feeding beetles, their presence in star- 
ling stomachs is usually limited to a few individuals. They were 
found, however, in moderate numbers in nearly every stomach col- 
lected during the summer. 

Comparatively few of the large predatory carabids of the genera 
Carahus and Calosoma are captured by the starling, as, of 2,301 birds, 
only 20 had eaten the former and 3 the latter. Pterostichus, a genus 
of small beetles living largely on animal matter, was found more 
frequently, 160 birds out of 2,301 having fed on it. One member of 
this genus, P. lucublandus, a medium-sized beetle, was found in 102 
stomachs. Tliirteen birds had captured members of the genus Di- 
cselus, a highly beneficial group which feeds on insects, and 67 had 
eaten various species of Platynus, beetles with somewhat similar food 
habits. Ninety-five stomachs contained members of the genus 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 19 

Chlxnius, also insectivorous, and in 36 were the remains of Casnonia 
pennsylvanica, a curious and easily recognized little carabid. 

By far the greater part of the carabids eaten by the starlmg are 
those that are known to be somewhat vegetarian in habits, notably 
certain members of the genera Harpalus and Anisodactylus. These 
beetles feed to a considerable extent on grass seeds and pollen and, 
therefore, can not be classed among the more beneficial carabids. 
Eight species o:^ Harpalus were identified in the material exammed, 
and in 277 stomachs the identification could be carried down only to 
the genus. Harpalus caliginosus, the largest member of the group, 
was identified in 144 stomachs, and H. pennsylvanicus in 79. One 
hundred and tliirty-eight birds had eaten beetles referable to Ani- 
sodactijlus, but these could not be specifically identified. Of the 
four species of this genus found in starlmg stomachs, A. rusticus, 
identified in 65, was the most common. Carabids of the genus Amara, 
that are to a considerable extent vegetarian in their feeding habits, 
were eaten by 151 of the starlings examined; Scarites suhterraneus 
was found in 14 stomachs; and Agonoderus pallipes, which is injurious 
to sprouting corn, in 3. 

Wlien feeding heavily on carabids, thfe starling usually secures a 
number of species. For instance, a bird shot in New Jersey in 
April, that had made 91 per cent of its meal on carabids, had eaten 

1 Amara, 1 Anisodactylus, 1 Platynus cupripennis, and 1 Agonoderus; 
while a June bird from the same State had taken 20 Amara penn- 
sylvanica and at least 2 other carabids, these forming 75 per cent of 
the stomach contents. A July bird from Connecticut that had made 
13 percent of its meal on beetles of this family had varied the menu 
by taking 2 Pterostichus lucublandus, 1 Bemhidium quadrimaculatum , 

2 Harpalus sp., 2 Anisodactylus rusticus, and 1 other carabid. A New 
Jersey bird taken in the same month had devoured 19 Amara, 3 Ago- 
noderus, 2 Anisodactylus; 1 1 Harpalus, and 2 other carabids, which 
totaled 84 per cent of the food. A Pennsylvania bird collected in 
August had eaten 1 Harpalus caliginosus, 2 H. pennsylvanicus, 10 H. 
erythropus, 5 PterosticJius lucublandus, 1 Anisodactylus, and 1 other 
carabid — items wliich formed 72 per cent of the stomach contents. 

It must be admitted that in its fondness for terrestrial carabids the 
starling does some harm by consuming useful forms, but a study of 
the above data shows that only a small part of the Carabidse eaten 
are of the decidedly beneficial species. 

The scarabseids, or lamellicorn beetles, follow the weevils and 
carabids in the quantity of food furnished the starling, 2.24 per cent 
coming from this source. Of these by far the most important are 
the Ma}^ beetles (PJii/llopJiaga, adults of the notorious white grubs), 
which furnish the bulk of the 2.24 per cent. Both adults and larva3 
are eaten, the former more frequently. No less than 11 species of 



20 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

this genus were identified in the food of the starling, and from 4 to 8 
individuals were frequently found in a single stomach. One bird 
collected in June had eaten 12. Approximately 300 of the 2,301 
adults had taken May beetles, most of them in May, when they 
formed 11.04 per cent of the food. Dung beetles of the genera 
ApJiodius and Atsenius were commonly eaten, and Canthon and 
Onthopliagus less frequently. Investigations conducted in 1919 to 
determine the bird enemies of the recently imparted Japanese 
beetle {Popillia japonica) revealed the fact that the starling preys 
also on this insect; 2 of 6 starlings collected at Riverton, N. J., in 
August, had fed on it. 

The Staphylinidse (rove beetles), Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles), 
Elateridfe (click beetles), Tenebrionidse (darkling beetles), and 
others were taken in varying numbers. Most of these are small 
forms, and a considerable number could be destroyed without 
appreciably affecting the various percentages. Among the beetles 
of these families which were frequently eaten were many of economic 
interest, a few of which are here mentioned. Drasterius elegans, the 
larva of which is a wireworm that feeds on the roots of corn and 
other grains, had been eaten by 17 of the 2,301 adult starlings; 
Agriotes mancus, a species of similar habits, by 4; and Colaspis 
hrunnea, a small leaf beetle that attacks beans, strawberries, and 
other cultivated plants, by 56. 

Near Medford, N. J., it was stated that starlings had been seen 
working through a potato patch picking up potato beetles. Corrob- 
orative evidence was lent to this observation by finding the potato 
beetle {Leptinotarsa decemlineata) in the stomachs of 24 of 2,301 adult 
starlings and in 15 of 325 nestlings. Several birds had taken 4 indi- 
viduals, while two nestlings had been fed 6 and 7, respectively. Many 
other chrysomelids, all of which are more or less harmful, are included 
in the food of the starling, the genera Typophorus, Nodonota, Zygo- 
gramma, CalligrapTia, Oallerucella, Oedionychis, and Chsetocnema ap- 
pearing regularly, though in small numbers. 

The only darkling beetle taken in numbers was Opatrinus notus, 
found in the stomachs of 82 adults. Aside from these, a long list of 
other beetles, a few beneficial but most of them injurious, were iden- 
tified in small numbers. On the whole, it may be said that the evi- 
dence obtained by a study of the starling's destruction of Coleoptera 
is overwhelmingly in the bird's favor. 

Orthoptera (Grasshoppers, Crickets, and Locusts). 

While grasshoppers are not the serious pest in the Eastern States 
that they sometimes become west of the Mississippi, they neverthe- 
less exact a certain annual toil from crops. A conservative estimate 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 21 

of the annual loss in this country due to the grasshoppers is 
$50,000,000." This would be much greater were it not for the con- 
trolling influence of insectivorous birds. Some of these, among which 
may be placed the starling, secure practically all of their insect food 
during September and October from this source, stopping thereby the 
depredations of millions of these insects and preventing the future 
development of countless millions more. 

Orthoptera, among wliioh the shorthorned grasshoppers (Acri- 
dida^) and crickets (Gryllidae) predominated, constituted 12.41 per 
cent of the annual food of the adult starlings examined. August to 
November, inclusive, are the months of greatest consumption, the 
percentages being 22.30, 30.75, 38.95, and 38.26, respectively. De- 
cember and January are represented by 4.76 and 4.42 per cent, while 
from Februarys to July few Orthoptera are secured, a fact quite 
logically explained by the life history of the insect. The extent to 
which the adult starling resorts to this food is shown by the fact 
that of the 2,301 stomachs examined over 800 contained the remains 
of Orthoptera, and during the height of the grasshopper season, from 
August to November, inclusive, 577 of 772 birds had fed on them. 

When hay fields are being cut and raked in the latter part of August 
and early in September, flocks of juvenile starlings secure practically 
all their sustenance from these insects, supplemented with wild black 
cherries (Prunus serotina) and elderberries (Sambucus canadensis). 
Of a series of 20 birds collected in one hayfield near West Englewood, 
N. J., 16 had fed on Orthoptera, including acridids and crickets of 
the genera Gryllus and Nemohius. Still more remarkable is a series 
of 138 stomachs collected from September 20 to September 28 in the 
vicinity of Freehold, N. J. : All but 9 of these contained grasshoppers 
or crickets, and in bulk the insects formed 24 per cent of the food. 
That Orthoptera are abundant and sought for faithfully in the cool 
days of October is shown by a series of 11 stai lings secured near 
Meriden, Conn. : These insects had supplied food for all of these birds 
and formed the sole content of 5 stomachs, and in bulk formed over 
85 per cent of the total food taken. These 11 birds had destroyed 
no less than 40 grasshoppers, 77 crickets, and 1 locustid; 24 of 25 
starlings secured in the vicinity of Meriden, Conn,, in November, had 
also subsisted on Orthoptera to the extent of over 58 per cent of their 
food. In the stomachs of 6 of these, Orthoptera formed over 90 per 
cent of the contents. 

Individual stomachs frequently contained sui'prisingly large num- 
bers of crickets and grasshoppers. Inasmuch as information on this 
point is secured usually by counting the jaws of these insects, it often 

9 Marlatt, C. L., The Food Bill of Destructive Insects of the United States, Reclamation Record, vol. 
VIII, no. 9, p. 427, September, 1917. 



22 BULLETIN 868, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

happens that the undigested remains of previous meals are recorded, 
but from the rapidity of digestion observed in other passerine birds, 
it seems highly probable that all particles of a starling's meal will 
have either been digested or passed on to the intestines in the course 
of a few hours. With this fact in mind, the significance of the fol- 
lowing data may be appreciated: 

A juvenile bird secured in September had eaten 7 short-horned 
grasshoppers (Acrididse), 1 field cricket (Oryllus), and no less than 47 
small striped ground crickets (NemoMus) ; a second bird from the 
same flock had taken 5 grasshoppers, 2 field crickets, and 47 small 
striped ground crickets; and a third, 6 grasshoppers, 1 locustid iXi- 
fJiidium), 1 field cricket, and 42 small striped ground crickets. In 
19 other stomachs the last-named insect numbered 20 or more 
Even the larger acridids were at times taken in quantity: A starling 
collected on September 2 had consumed 22, along with a locustid. 
Another had taken 16 acridids, 3 locustids, and 2 field crickets. A 
third ate 13 acridids, 3 locustids, 2 field crickets, and 1 small striped 
ground cricket. 

Among the grasshoppers eaten by starlings were the red-legged 
locust {Melano])lus femur-rubrum) , the green-striped locust (Clior- 
tophaga viriclifasciata) , and a number of the small grouse locusts (Tet- 
tiginae). Besides the field cricket {GryTLus fennsylvanicus) and the 
small striped ground cricket {Neinolnus fasciatus) , a single specimen 
of the mole cricket {Gryllotcdpa horealis) was taken. Additional re- 
lated species were also eaten by nestling starlings, a discussion of 
whose relation to Orthoptera is presented on page 42, 

Lepidoptera (Mainly Caterpillars). 

Lepidopterous remains in the food of the starling are composed 
almost entirely of the larvae, or caterpillars, the greater part being 
consumed by nestlings (see p. 41). In the stomachs of adults these 
insects constituted 6.04 per cent of the yearly food. May and June 
are the months of greatest consumption, when such food forms 13.97 
and 20.56 per cent, respectively, of the total. In September cater- 
pillars formed less than 1 per cent (0.83) of the diet, while the remain- 
ing months of the year are represented with quantities varying from 
1.04 per cent to 5.69 per cent of the food. 

Of the 2,301 stomachs of adult starlings examined, 538 contained 
the remains of caterpillars; 20 contained pupae; and 30, adult Lepi- 
doptera. In June, the height of the caterpillar season, over half 
(115 of 205) of the adult birds used in this investigation had fed on 
Lepidoptera in one form or another, while in the preceding month 
81 of 133 had taken such food. 

Conspicuous among those birds which had fed extensively on 
caterpillars is a series of 31 adults collected in the middle of June, 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 23 

near Flemington, N. J. Only one had failed to eat such food, which 
on the average formed 27.8 per cent of the bulk. In point of num- 
bers, a starling collected at New Haven, Conn., takes the honors. In 
this bird's stomach were the remains of no less than 40 caterpillars, 
which formed 98 per cent of the food. 

The terrestrial feeding habits of the starling limit the variety of 
caterpillars eaten, but this very restriction has permitted the bird to 
distinguish itself as a most effective enemy of that notorious pest, 
the cutworm. Wliile caterpillar remains are not the most satis- 
factory items for identification in stomach contents and only occa- 
sionally are in condition for specific determination, the material in 
fully two-thirds of the starling stomachs could be referred with a 
fair degree of certainty to the family Noctuidae. 

Corroborative of what stomach exammation has revealed is a bit 
of testimony secured from field observations on a farm at Adelphia, 
N. J., where starlmgs were observed doing exceptionally good work 
on the army worm. A rather heavy mfestation of this insect had 
resulted in considerable damage, when a large flock of juvenile star- 
lings started to feed regularly in the infested area ; within a few days 
the worms had practically disappeared from those fields. 

That other terrestrial caterpillars may find an enemy in the starling 
is recorded by an observer near Bloomfield, N. J., who, in the fall of 
1915, witnessed starlings feeding on the larvae of the cabbage butterfly. 

In only a few instances were hau'y or spiny caterpillars found in 
stomachs of adults. Among these were the American tent cater- 
pillar (Malacosoma americana) , an arctiid, and a "silver spot" 
{Argynnis cyhele). One reason for not finding more spiny or hairy 
caterpillars may be explained by an incident observed at Norwalk, 
Conn., where a starling was seen to eat a tent caterpillar inuch after 
the fashion of the Baltimore oriole, by forcing out the soft parts and 
leaving the hairy skin hanging on the limb. 

Miscellaneous Insects. 

Of other orders of insects from which starlings secm*e part of their 
sustenance, Hymenoptera, including bees, wasps, and ants, is best 
represented. This is of little importance, however, as tlje average 
monthly percentage is only 1.75, a great part of which is composed 
of ants. Most of this food is consumed during the summer, the 
monthly percentages from April to October inclusive being as follows : 
1.11, 3.33, 3.41, 2.56, 2.14, 2.49, and 3.79. None of the late fall, 
winter, or early spring months were represented by as much as 1 
per cent. 

Connected with the capture of Hymenoptera is one of the oddest 
activities of the starling. While primarily teri'estrial feeders, soon 
after the fu'st of August young starlings were seen catchmg insects on 



24 BULLETIN 868, U. s. DEPARTMEISTT OF AGRICULTURE. 

the wing, much after the fashion of true flycatchers. From a perch 
on a dead upper limb the birds would spy insects several yards away, 
fly out, and dexterously captm'e them. Later, after the first of Octo- 
ber, starlings changed their tactics, adopting methods similar to those 
of swallows or martins in securing flying insects. The best illustra- 
tion of these activities was furnished in northern New Jersey on a 
calm day above a warm, sunlit meadow. Here a dozen or more star- 
lings were sailing about and capturing insects at a height of about a 
hundred feet from the ground. Under such conditions one not ac- 
quainted with the starling would certainly have mistaken the birds 
for martins, for, combined with a form which is quite similar, was this 
fhght evolution, which imitated the martins perfectly. 

Many ants in the winged stage are captured by starlings in their 
aerial evolutions, some are picked up on the ground, and others are 
secured from the branches of trees. On September 5 a number of 
juvenile starlings were noted diligently searching for and picking up 
food from the upper branches of a spruce. To some extent their 
actions imitated those of chickadees or warblers, though they were 
not so sprightly. One of these bu'ds was collected and its stomach 
found to be filled with ants. 

Ants of the genus Myrmica are most frequently eaten by the star- 
lings. Lasius, Formica, and ApJisenogaster also are taken. Bene- 
ficial ichneumonoid Hymenoptera were found in over 75 of the 2,301 
stomachs of adults, but in most cases only a single insect each. The 
infrequent occurrence of bees and wasps in the food also indicates that 
they, as well as the ichneumons, are picked up here and there, no 
special effort being made by the starling to secm-e them. 

Hemiptera, true bugs, form only an unimportant part (less than 1 
per cent) of the food of the starling. March is the month of greatest 
consumption, due mainly to the quantity of soldier bugs (Pentatom- 
idae) eaten, these offensively odored insects forming over 2.5 per 
cent of the food in this month. As both predacious and plant- 
feeding forms are found among these insects, the result of an indis- 
criminate feeding on soldier bugs must be construed as neutral in its 
effect. In fact, this same construction may be placed on all the 
Hemiptei^ eaten by starlings. Among the plant feeders were found 
the chinch bug (Blissus leucopterus) , the squash bug (Anasa tristis), 
and the tarnished plant-bug {Lygus pratensis) ; and among the pre- 
dacious forms, the assassin bug (Sinea diadema and Melanolestes 
picipes) . 

Diptera (flies and their larvae) were present in only a limited num- 
ber of stomachs and formed a little more than 0.5 per cent of the 
annual food. Much of this material is secured about garbage heaps 
and in the neighborhood of cattle, with which starlings are familiar 
associates. The bu'ds have been seen picking flies from the legs of 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 25 

COWS and in a few instances actually alighting upon their backs with 
the apparent intent of catching flies. In pastures starlings secure 
maggots by visiting partially dried cow di'oppings, which they thor- 
oughly riddle by puncturing with their bills. As this material dries 
it becomes pulverized and scattered over several square feet of sur- 
face. Under such treatment dipterous larvae not actually eaten by 
the birds soon die for want of moistiu'e. 

MILLIPEDS. 

So far as known, no other bird in this country equals the starling 
in the destruction of millipeds. These creatures form 11.71 per cent 
of the adult bu'd's yearljr diet. In April they amount to 54.69 per 
cent; in May, 42.19 per cent; and in June, 23.66 per cent; and, after 
a falling off in the later summer months, they again rise to 7.64 per 
cent in October. The fact that in April 119 adult birds of 132 ex- 
amined, in May 133 of 140, and in June 146 of 215, had fed on milli- 
peds, furnishes an idea of the persistence with which starlings search 
for such food in spring and e&rlj summer. Fifteen of the birds col- 
lected in April had taken nothing else, and 14 others had secured over 
nine-tenths of their food from millipeds. 

At present the economic status of millipeds m this comitry is not 
fully miderstood. Were the theory accepted that was generally 
entertained a few years ago that millipeds feed entirely on decaying 
vegetable matter, the starling's destruction of them would have to 
be construed of neutral effect. In England, however, millipeds of 
the same and closely related genera are decidedly destructive in 
gardens, and recent investigations have shown that they have 
smiilar habits in this comitry. Damage to beans, strawberries, 
melons, cucumbers, radishes, and potatoes has been attributed to 
one species (Julus cseruleocinctus) which is a favorite fCbd item of the 
starlmg. The full significance of the starlmg' s destruction of millipeds 
will be Imown only when the habits of these animals are better under- 
stood. Whether their status be neutral or injurious, in feeding on 
them the starlmg secures a much needed supply of ojiimal food and 
at the same tune does not draw materially from the supply of other 
birds, few of which have shown a preference for millipeds. 

SPIDERS. 

Spiders hold by no means the attraction for adult starlings that 
they do for the nestlmgs (see p. 43) . Of the 2,30 1 stomachs examined, 
480 contained spiders, which formed 1.48 per cent of the annual diet. 
In only one month did they constitute over 3 per cent of the ft)od; 
in December, 17 of 44 birds had eaten spiders to the extent of 3.48 
per cent of then- food. Most of the arachnids eaten were wolf 
spiders (Lycosidae), which are terrestrial in habits and generally 
182334°— 21 4 



26 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

considered less distinctly beneficial than some of the other spiders 
which secure many of the flying insect pests in their silken nets. 

MOLLUSKS. 

In contrast with the large numbers of injurious slugs secured by 
the starling in some parts of its native home, particularly in England, 
is the quantity and character of the molluscan food of the bird in 
this country. MoUusks of various kinds, but mainly land snails, 
formed less than 1 per cent (0.94) of its annual food. A large part 
of this was secured in October, when 20 of the 108 birds examined 
had fed on it. These 20 birds were collected along the Connecticut 
shore, the snails eaten being mainly of the genus Melampus. In no 
case was a land slug detected. 

MISCELLANEOUS ANIMAL FOOD. 

The remains of earthworms, fragments of a crab, a few beach fleas 
(Orchestia), sowbugs (Porcellio), bones of a salamander (in one 
stomach) , and bits of fat, suet, or cartilage, secured apparently from 
garbage dumps or at the winter feeding stations erected to attract 
birds, fill out the varied animal diet of the starlmg. AU these items 
combined form only 1.32 per cent of the bird's yearly food, and most 
of them are secured durmg the winter and early spring months. 
That the bird's desire for animal food is in a measure satisfied as soon 
as the whiter' s snow disappears in March is revealed by the quantity 
of annual garbage consumed in that month, when it forms about 8 
per cent of the diet. The main grievance agamst the starling for its 
consumption of the foregoing food items is entertamed by bird lovers 
whose generous supplies of suet put out for native birds soon dis- 
appear when (Jfecovered by a flock of starlings. 

VEGETABLE FOOD OF ADULTS. 

CHERRIES. 

One of the most frequent complaints against the starHng is in 
connection with its fondness for cherries. From the economic 
standpoint, this is undoubtedly its most objectionable habit. The 
cherry is cultivated on a commercial scale in only a part of the 
starlmg's present range, but is grown as a home fruit, a tree or two 
about the dooryard, tln'oughout most of its habitat. This condition 
reliders the crop peculiarly susceptible to attack by robms and star- 
lings, the two most abundant fruit-eating birds of the region. 

In 1915, on a farm near Closter, N. J., trees that should have pro- 
duced $50 to $60 worth of cherries yielded only $10 worth, a loss 
largely due to starlings. At Bristol, Conn., a flock of about 300 
starlings entirely stripped a single tree of its 1916 crop in less than 15 
minutes. At Rowayton, Conn., six cherry trees were entirely stripped 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 27 

of their fruit by robins and starlings in 1916. These are but examples 
of the many instances which came to the notice of the wi'iters while 
in the field of birds taking part or all of the fruit from isolated trees. 

Of the 2,301 stomachs of adult starlmgs examined, 169 contained 
cultivated cherries, which formed 2.66 per cent of the yearly food of 
the species. Early cherries m June were eaten by 67 of the 215 birds 
examined, while late varieties m July furnished food for 91 of 375. 
In June, this fruit formed 17.01 per cent of the adult starling's food, 
and in July, 14.92 per cent. 

Without attemptmg to mitigate the offense of the starling by calling 
attention to another notorious cherry thief, some idea of the extent of 
the starlmg's activities may be gained by comparmg its food habits 
with those of the robm. From the exammation of 1,236 stomachs of 
robins, it has been fomid that this species feeds on cultivated fruit 
to the extent of 8.63 per cent of its annual food, as agamst 4.41 for 
the starling. During the months of Jmie and July, the robms 
obtamed 24.58 per cent and 22.71 per cent, respectively, of their food 
from cultivated cherries, quantities half agam as great as those con- 
smned by starlings in the same months. Another matter of note is 
the nmuber of complamts agamst the robm as compared with the 
number made against the starling for the same offense. This is m 
part due to the different methods of feeding employed by the two 
species. The robin is miiversaUy distributed and feeds m loose 
flocks, individuals of which may be fomid maintaining an almost 
uninterrupted procession to and from some favorite cherry tree for 
entire days. At no time will a great number of the birds be found in 
a tree, but the slow drain on the cherry crop is constant through all 
hours of dayhght. The birds are frequently feeding young at this 
time and are carrying cherries to them. On the other hand, star- 
lings, the young of which are the chief offenders, frequently gather m 
large flocks, and, swoopmg down on a single tree, completely strip it of 
fruit while other trees m the neighborhood may remam untouched. 
As a result, while practically every cherry grower complams of the 
robin, those who suffer from the more spectacular raids of the star- 
hng are much more bitter m their complaints. This condition led 
to an mvestigation at several pomts in Connecticut to determine 
the relative damage caused by several cherry-eating species, and trees 
were watched to determine as far as possible the number of birds 
eatmg the fruit. The summary of the data obtained is presented in 
Table I. 



28 



BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Table I. — Comparison of depredations by various species of birds on cherry trees in Con- 
necticut. 





N 


amber of birds that came to eat cherries. 




Date and length of time 
spent at each tree. 


Star- 
lings. 


Rob- 
ins. 


Cat- 
birds 


Pur- 
ple 
grack- 
les. 


Rose 
breast- 
ed. 

gros- 
beaks. 


Eng- 
lish 
spar- 
rows. 


Balti- 
more 
ori- 
oles. 


Oow- 
l)irds. 


Red- 
winged 
Ijlack- 
birds. 


Blue 
jays. 


Chip- 
ping 
spar- 
rows. 


Total 
birds. 




12 
19 


17 
17 
42 
14 


7 
""9" 


1 

8 


2 


1 


2 










42 




1 


1 






46 








1 






52 




8 


5 


2 


1 


1 








31 




15 i 2 

4 i 

50 








17 




4 
1 
















58 




1 

20 
3 
















52 




4 


















24 


July 10, 21irs 

Totals 

Percentage 


4 


3 


2 


3 








4 


5 


48 












113 187 22 




6 





3 


2 


1 


4 


5 


370 


30.54 50.55 ; 5.94 


5.94 


1.63 


1.35 


0.81 


0.54 


0.27 


1.08 


1.35 



On examination of this table it is found that about half the birds 
feeding on cherries were robins, less than a third were starlings, and 
the others were of various species, none numerous enough to be of 
any consequence. This interesting bit of evidence is confirmed by 
stomach analyses of robins and starlings. The stomachs of 1 1 robins, 
collected while feeding m cherry trees, contained 10.27 per cent 
animal matter and 89.73 vegetable matter, of which 85.73 per cent 
was cultivated cherries. Forty-nine starlings, obtained under the 
same circumstances, had fed on animal matter to the extent of 58.12 
per cent of their food; and vegetable matter, 41.88 per cent; cultivated 
cherries formed 36.72 per cent of the total. 

It was the experience of the wi'iters that shooting a few starlings 
from cherry trees soon discouraged the survivors so effectually that 
they seldom returned. The robins, on the other hand, were exceed- 
ingly bold and paid no attention to any frightening devices placed 
in the trees or to shooting. Frequently a starlmg or a robin was 
shot from a tree without alarming other robins feedmg. 

From the above data it will be seen that the starlmg eats fewer 
cherries, both individually and as a species, than the robin, although 
his attacks are much more conspicuous. Accordmg to most ob- 
servers, the robm, as well as the starlmg, mcreased considerably in 
numbers in the decade following 1910 throughout the area covered 
by this mvestigation, and both species are undoubtedly responsible 
for the mcreasing difficulties of cherry culture. Both species have 
habits to recommend them on economic grounds, with the starling 
in the more favorable position on account of its smaller consumption 
of fruit and much larger consmnption of noxious insects.^" 

1" For a detailed record of the robin's food, see Food of the Robins and Bluebirds of the United States, 
by F. E. L. Beal, Bull. 171, U. S. Dept. of Agr., pp. 2-15, 1915. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 29 

BERRIES. 

Some complaints of damage to strawberries have been made, but 
the mvestigation failed to reveal extensive depredations by the 
starling. A few farmers in New Jersey stated that the birds oc- 
casionally ate berries, and one farmer in Connecticut shot 9 birds out 
of a flock that started in on his berry patch. At the discharge of the 
gun the starlmgs flew away and did not return. Little complaint 
was made of damage to blackberries or raspberries, and as in most 
places wild varieties are more abundant than cultivated ones there 
is little danger of the starling doing much damage to such fruits. 

APPLES. 

Field work conducted in September and October was devoted 
largely to investigating complamts about starlings damaging late 
fruits, particularly apples. Extensive inquiries were made among 
the farmers in those sections of New Jersey and Connecticut where 
the starling was common, and no opportunity of collectmg in orchards 
was overlooked. Considering the time and attention given to this 
phase of the subject, it must be stated at the outset that positive 
incrmimating evidence agauist the starUng secured from personal 
observation and stomach analysis is small. 

Of the 2,301 stomachs of adult starlmgs examined, 45 contained 
the pulp or skui of apples. Only 22 of the 45, however, were among 
those collected in September and October, the remainder havmg been 
taken in whiter and early sprmg, when the fruit eaten was manifestly 
waste, left on the trees or fallen to the ground. In bulk, cultivated 
fruit other than cherries, of which a large part was apples, formed 
1.75 per cent of the total annual food. In September it amounted 
to 2.19 per cent, and in October, 0.38 per cent. A large part of the 
stomachs in which apples occurred were secured in small orchards 
m the vicmity of Adelphia, Monmouth Comity, N. J., whence 
several complamts had come. 

On September 22, 1916, a flock of 200 or more juvenile starlmgs 
were seen feeding on apples in a small orchard of middle-aged trees 
near Adelphia. Only a few appeared to be eathig the fruit, the 
remamder being engaged in singmg or preenmg their feathers. After- 
wards the trees were inspected. The apples in the central top of the 
trees were the ones sampled, and in many instances it was noted 
that the birds had gone back to feed on fruit pecked openon previous 
occasions. An opening an inch or two in diameter was pecked in the 
skin aii-d then a large portion of the pulp was eaten out tlii'ough this 
break (see PI. IV, fig. 2). 

On the following day a flock of birds was observed at work in a tree 
of russet apples on a neighboring farm. Subsequent inspection of 



30 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

the fruit in the tree top showed that probably not over 5 per cent of 
the apples had been pecked. 

At Glen Cove, N. Y., a flock of about 100 starlings was noted 
attacking the fruit in one tree of an orchard where damage had been 
reported in previous years. On this occasion about one apple in 
every five was damaged. The owner of this orchard, who was a keen 
observer of bu'ds, asserted that stai'lings had ruined 10 per cent of 
liis crop in 1915. Of 30 barrels picked, 3 had to ])e discarded. 

Isolated apple trees, especially those standing in the middle of 
hay fields where flocks of juvenile bu'ds ai'e accustomed to feed on 
insects, are likely to have then- fruit damaged. Such a tree at 
East Noi-walk, Conn., had nearly every apple pecked, and a similar 
one was found near Farmington, N. J., but in neither case was the 
crop of any value, and it was never harvested. 

Late-miaturing varieties are more likely to be attacked by star- 
lings than those ripening at the height of the apple season, owing 
possibly to the fact that the supply of wild fruit, as wild black cherry 
{Prunus serotina) and sour gum {Nyssa sylvatica), has been mate- 
rially depleted by that time. The starling's taste for apples, com- 
bined with its flocking habit, presents a condition which should be 
watched because of the bird's capacity for damage. At present, 
however, the aggregate damage done is not great. On no farm 
given largely to fruit-raising, where the trees were thi-ifty and well 
kept, was injury to apples observed or reported. The number of 
extensive fruit raisers in areas of starling abundance who had no 
complaint to make is legion. At present the bulk of the damage is 
confined to old orchards and isolated trees. In many cases the 
damaged fruit is on trees sadly neglected and of inferior quality. 

PEARS AND PEACHES. 

In only three stomachs was the pulp of pears found (twice in Sep- 
tember and once in January) and field work also yielded little posi- 
tive evidence that the starling damages this fruit. One report from 
Ambler, Pa., asserted that in 1915 starlings had ruined a whole tree 
of pears; additional reports of damage came from Bloomfield, N. J., 
but in none of these was the loss great. Injury to peaches is also 
slight — one of the more specific reports came from a farmer of 
Warren, R. I., who stated that in 1914 he had lost about 2 per cent 
of his crop on account of starlings. 

GRAPES. 

To a limited extent starlings have exhibited in this country the 
same habits that have made them unpopular during late summer 
in the vineyards of France. Testimony on this point comes entirely 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLIN'G. 31 

from outside observers. No grapes were found in the stomachs ex- 
amined and no damage of this kind was observed by representatives 
of the Biological Survey. A farmer in the Brookdale section north 
of Bloomfield, N. J., reported that starlings had severely damaged 
grapes on a small arbor on his farm, and similar complaints came 
from a number of farmers in the neighboring sections about Rich- 
field, N. J. No damage was reported in the extensive vineyards 
about Vineland, in southern New Jersey, but as the starling was not 
yet abundant there this can not be looked upon as an indication of 
its innocence. As in the case of apples, the injury to gTapes is at 
present trivial in the aggregate and is practically nil in extensive 
grape-raising sections, but from the starling's reputation in some 
parts of Europe it will bear watching in these surroundings. 

CORN. ^ 

Probably the losses to crops most keenly felt by the farmers living 
in the intensively cultivated area in northeastern New Jersey, about 
the cities of Hackensack, Bloomiield, Elizabeth, and Newark, are 
those infhcted by grain-eating birds on sweet corn. During July 
and August mixed flocks, sometimes niunbering into the thousands, 
of grackles, red-winged blackbirds, cowbirds, and, in recent years, 
starlings, roam through the country, securing the bulk of their sus- 
tenance from cornfields. Sweet corn, just ready for market, is torn 
open, some of the juicy kernels eaten, and the ear either rendered 
unsalable or its market value considerably reduced. In the aggi'e- 
gate such losses are very gi^eat and in the eyes of the farmers of 
northeastern New Jersey, the starling is to blame for a large share of 
the damage. However, as in the case of men, who are often judged 
by their company, the starling has been accused of deeds perpetrated 
largely by the species with which it associates. Not only were these 
birds generally charged with eating as much corn as the grackles 
and red-wings, an assumption which has been disproved, but many 
farmers were uncertain of their identification, with the result that 
flocks of juvenile red-wings were often called starlings and their 
depredations charged against the latter. 

Of the total of 2,301 adult starling stomachs examined, 52 con- 
tained corn, and this formed less than 1 per cent (0.77) of their yearly 
food. Of the 1,059 starlings collected during the ripening and har- 
vesting season of July, August, September, and October, only 14 
had fed on corn, which constituted only 0.2 per cent of their food 
during this period. In the planting and sprouting season of April 
and May, 6 of 249 adult starlings had fed on corn, which formed 0.52 
per cent of the food. By far the largest part of the corn eaten by 
starlings is waste grain secured in winter and early spring. In Jan- 



32 BULLETIN 8G8, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. . 

uary corn forms 1.54 per cent of the diet, in February 2.03 per cent^ 
and in March 3.49 per cent, the largest proportion recorded for any 
month. 

While the result of the examination of so large and thoroughly 
representative a series of stomachs refutes all the extreme accusa- 
tions against the starlings as a corn eater, a discussion of field obser- 
vations made in this connection will emphasize this point and show 
where the blame lies. A number of complaints had come from the 
vicinity of West Englewood, N. J. This section was visited in the 
middle of August, when a survey of some of the most seriously dam- 
aged fields was made. Much of the sweet corn had been harvested, 
but there were still some fields of the late varieties in which 
birds were at work, and in patches of early corn saved for seed a rec^ 
ord of their activities earlier in the season was found. A farmer of 
West Englewood, who is familiar with the starling, reported that 
starlings joined with red-wings in damaging his crop. A census of part 
of a seed patch on his farm showed that of 863 eare of sweet corn 
examined, 231 had been injured by birds, a percentage of over 26. 
On another farm at Teaneck, N. J., fully 33 per cent of the seed 
corn had been damaged. Examination of a field at Kiver Edge, 
N. J., revealed 100 damaged ears out of 297 inspected. Several other 
seed patches in this general vicinity were even more seriously dam- 
aged, in one case on several hxmdred stalks scarcely a single ear being 
left unmutilated. 

An insight of what species were doing such work, and were prob- 
ably also to blame for most of the injury to seed patches earlier, was 
secured on a farm near West Englewood, N. J., on August 23. Here 
a mixed flock of red-wings and grackles were feeding on a field of 
sweet corn in which pickers were at work. The field was large and 
the birds would feed in parts distant from the pickers. The owner 
asserted that already he had 2,500 ears damaged, and that while 
many of these were still salable they brought reduced prices, only 
50 to 75 cents per 100 being paid instead of $2, the market value of 
perfect ears at that time. A careful watch for several days in this 
and surrounding fields failed to disclose a single &tarhng feeding there, 
while the red-wings and grackles spent Httle time elsewhere. Ju- 
venile red-wings were generally considered starhngs by the farmers 
of this locality. 

On a few occasions the investigators observed starlings actuaUy 
tearing down the husks of corn and feeding on the kernels, but in no 
case were starlings in large-sized flocks seen inflicting serious dam- 
age. Positive incriminating testimony has come, however, from 
other observers. A reliable observer of Glastonbury, Conn., has 
seen flocks, composed entirely of starlings, doing damage to the corn 
crop in two fields to the extent of 25 per cent and 10 per cent, respec- 



Bui. 868, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Plate IV. 




Fig. I.— Sweet Corn Damaged by Mixed Flocks of 
Starlings and Red-Winged Blackbirds. 

Only a small portion of the com in this patch, saved for seed, was 
harvested, owing to the depredations of birds. Red-winged blact- 
birds were chiefly to blame. 




Fig. 2.— Russet Apples Damaged by Starlings. 

These apples were from the tops of trees in an old orchard near Adelphia, N. J. Some of the damaged 
fruit showed evidence that the birds returned to an apple opened on a previous visit. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 33 

tively. A resident of Rochelle Park, N. J., who is well acquainted 
with the starling, asserted that for several years past these birds 
had taken toll from his fields. Others also have seen the starlings,, 
while part of a mixed flock, actually feeding on the ears of corn. 

Damage to field corn was reported less frequently than to sweet 
corn, and the reports were subject to the same errors of identification 
of birds. On one farm west of West Caldwell, N. J., the starling was 
bitterly criticized for its work on a 2 to 3 acre patch. Some time 
was spent observing the bird visitants to this field, and it was found 
that English sparrows were busily engaged in tearing down the 
husks for an inch or two, as far as their strength allowed, and eating 
the terminal kernels. 

In the vicinity of Freehold, N. J., where a large starling-grackle 
roost was located, flocks of starlings were common about the middle 
of September in the near-by cornfields. Many of the birds would 
perch on the top of the cornstalks and sing, fully as many would 
be on the ground apparently in search of insects, and a few could 
be noted pecking the ends of the ears. One field of several acres 
appeared to be a favorite resort, and earlier in the year, when the 
corn was in the milk, damage had been done there. The proprietor 
asserted that early in August, when most of the corn was dam- 
aged, starhngs in a large flock visited his field twice daily, morning 
and evening. A count in part of the field showed that of the 522 
ears examined 136, or more than 26 per cent, had been visited by 
birds. Over half the opened ears, however, showed the unmistak- 
able track of the corn worm. It is highly probable that the birds 
often devoured the insects they exposed in tearing down the husk. 
Another field, northwest of Freehold, which was visited by large 
flocks of starhngs in early morning and late afternoon, was carefully 
inspected, and very httle bird work was found, but a heavy infesta- 
tion of corn worms had severely damaged the crop. 

A comparison of the food habits of the starlings and grackles 
occupying the Freehold roost in September was obtained from the 
examination of material collected there. Six of the 116 starlings 
had fed on corn, and in the stomach of one, this grain formed 94 per 
cent of the contents, in another 60 per cent, in a third 12 per cent, 
and in the remaining three only 1 per cent each, making an average 
percentage of about 1 .5 for the lot. Twenty of the 27 grackles shot at 
the same roost had fed on corn, and in 1 1 tliis constituted the entire 
stomach contents. The corn consumed by the 27 gracldes formed 
over 76 per cent of their food. With this was over 11 per cent of 
other grain, principally oats. 

To a hmited extent starlings were accused of pulling sprouting 
corn, both sweet and field varieties. At Mendham, N. J., it was 
182334°— 21 5 



34 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

reported that starlings had pulled nearly an acre of corn in one field, 
and at Spring House, Pa., it was asserted that starlings had pulled 
corn so badly on a 10-acre field that it had to be replanted. 

Wliile laboratory examination shows that the starling is not an ex- 
tensive feeder on ripening corn, field observation indicated that where 
local conditions are favorable, as in the vicinity of roosts, the birds may 
do damage. The aggregate loss to the corn crop which can be defi- 
nitely attributed to the starling is not great. Many of the com- 
plaints against the starling have been based on a misidentification of 
the species — red-winged blackbirds and grackles being more f reciuently 
responsible. The aggregate loss to sprouting corn is trivial. The 
fact that starlings are easily frightened by gunfire and will shun an 
area after a day or two of shooting suggests effective preventive 
measures, which have not proved successful in the case of the other 
two species mentioned. 

SMALL GRAIN. 

The farmer has little need to fear the starling as a menace to small 
grains. Twenty of the 2,301 adult birds examined had fed on small 
grain, and of these 13 had eaten wheat, 6 oats, and 1 millet. In 
bulk this formed 0.39 per cent of the food, and fully half of this was 
eaten at a time of year when it manifestly must have been waste. 
The few complaints on this score were either so trivial in nature or so 
widely separated that the aggregate injury is not important. The 
complaints involved the picking up of newly sown oats, the ''pull- 
ing" of sprouting oats, and feeding on ripened wheat and millet. 
At Sound Beach, Long Island, a flock of about 500 starlings was 
noted feeding in a millet patch, the owner of which claimed that 
the birds had eaten all the seed from a similar patch in the previous 
year and that it appeared as if they would repeat the performance. 

GARDEN TRUCK. 

From the impossibility of satisfactorily identifying such food items 
as chewed-up bits of lettuce and spinach leaves, tender pods of peas, 
pulp of tomatoes, etc., it is apparent that stomach examination does 
not satisfactorily determine the relation of the starling to garden 
truck. In no case were such items positively identified in stomachs, 
though reliable field observers have witnessed attacks on these and 
other products of the garden at odd times. The depredations are 
confined mainly to small city gardens, where the succulent green 
foods are readily accessible to an unusually large number of star- 
lings. In intensively cultivated truck-crop areas, as in the Brook- 
dale section, north of Bloomfield, N. J., similar conditions sometimes 
prevail. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 35 

An observer of Stratford, Comi., has witnessed starlings pecking 
holes in his tomatoes, and an extensive grower of tomatoes at Strat- 
ford asserted that of the first three crates of tomatoes picked in 1917 
one had to be discarded, owing to the work of starlings. A farmer 
of Brookdale, N. J., has suffered losses to late tomatoes, and near-by 
growers complained that starlings scratched out seeds of radish, 
parsley, and spinach when these were sown under manure in winter 
and verj^ early spring. Similar complaints were heard in Richfield, 
south of Paterson, N. J. At Demarest, N. J., a muskmelon patch 
was inspected after starlings had been at work pulling the young 
sprouts. Of about 15 hills of 3 or 4 plants each only 7 plants re- 
mained. On tliis same farm starlings took all of two plantings of 
onion sets in a small garden near the house. On a farm west of Ora- 
dell, N. J., sprouting lima beans shared the same fate, and in a small 
garden in Hackensack, N. J., 150 young lettuce plants were "pulled." 
A resident of Bay Shore, N. Y., had many of his green peas taken by 
starlings. 

These instances are typical of the damage starlings may do to 
gardens. In the main their work is confined to small plots, and the 
losses are most keenly felt by the city dweUer who has painstakingly 
tilled and planted a few square yards of soil. In the extensive 
truck-crop sections the aggregate damage of tliis kind is not great. 

WILD FRUIT. 

The starling is essentially an insect-eating and fruit-eating bird, 
and wild fruits form the largest single item in its yearly food (23.86 
per cent). Both the quantity and variety natui-ally change with the 
season. In May, when millipeds, beetles, and other insects are abmi- 
dant, wild fruit disappears entirely from the diet. The first half of 
Jmie sees little change in the food habits, but as cherries begin to 
ripen the birds begin to flavor their diet with fruit, wild as well as 
cultivated; and mulberries (Morns rubra) and June berries (Ame- 
lanchier) form practically all of the 1.1 per cent of wild fruit taken in 
this month. In July, with the ripening of red and white mulberries, 
the starlings enter on a veritable orgy of fruit eating, which continues 
until well mto October, as one species of fruit after another ripens. 
In July, 35.82 per cent of the food consists of wild fruit, practically 
all of which is mulberries and blackberries. A rather open comitry, 
with occasional groups or single trees of mulberry or wild cherry, 
furnishes an ideal feeding ground for the flocks of young starlings 
which wander over the comitry during the summer and fall months. 

Early in August the chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), and later in 
the month the black cherry (Prunus serotina) and the elderberry 
(Samhucus canadensis), supply the bulk of the 40.88 per cent which 



36 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

represents the fruit consumption for this month. Other fruits taken 
in small quantities give variety even in the fruit portion of the diet. 

The 39.51 per cent of fruit consumed in September consists prin- 
cipally of the black cherry, which holds over from the preceding month,, 
sour-gum berries (Nyssa sylvatica), Virgmia creeper {Psedera quin- 
quefolia), elderberry (Samhucus) and small quantities of many other 
fruits which ripen at this season. 

By the first week in October many of the juicy berries are gone, 
although Virginia creeper and sour gum still furnish a considerable 
supply. These, however, soon disappear, and other sources of food 
are found in the immense niunber of grasshoppers present at this 
season and in bayberries {Myrica carolinensis) . These dry, hardj 
berries furnish the bulk of the 23.76 per cent of wild fruit found in 
the stomachs collected in this month, and supply a staple food 
throughout the winter. 

Wild fruit enters into the winter food in the following percentages: 
November, 41.80; December, 36.44; January, 19.98; February, 32.90. 
In all four months practically the only fruits taken are the waxy bay- 
berries and the seeds of the various species of Rhus, all of which are 
dry and hard, thinly covered with fruit pulp and skin. The starling 
apparently feeds on them only when unable to secure any other food. 
Whenever snow is off the ground the birds commence to search for 
insects and rctm'n to the sumac and bayberries only when compelled 
to do so by a fresh snowfall. In March, although there are few insects, 
available, the feedmg on wild fruit shows a decrease of over one-half, 
only 13.69 per cent of the month's food coming from this source. 
Garbage replaces it to a large extent, and it is apparent that the melt- 
ing of the snow enables the birds to feed more on the ground and 
depend less on the hard berries on which they had so largely subsisted 
during the whiter. 

April, with its increasing abmidance of early insects and millipeds,. 
shows a practical abandonment of fruit eating by the epecies. Only 
0.34 per cent of the food for this month is fruit, and this consists of 
a few seeds of Rhus and Myrica which escaped the winter's gleaning 
and have been picked up one or two at a time by different birds. 

Durmg the five months from October to February the starling 
takes the seeds of poison ivy (Rhus toxicodendron) in quantities vary- 
ing from 1.42 per cent in January to 7.77 per cent in December, and, 
while this item forms only 1.71 per cent of the annual food, it is of 
some economic importance. The seeds are eaten, as are all other 
berries of a similar natm^e, simply for the thin outer covering of pulp 
and skin, and the hard parts pass through the digestive tract or are 
regurgitated, their germinating qualities uninjured. The starling 
thus becomes an agent in their dissemination, but as the birds so 
often roost over city streets or in buildings, part of these seeds are 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STAELING. 37 

deposited in places where they can not gi'ow. In the actual spread 
of this noxious weed, the starling is probably less responsible than 
many of our native birds, which scatter most of their regurgitated 
seeds where they have at least a fair chance for growth. 

MISCELLANEOUS VEGETABLE FOOD. 

Of the total annual food of the starling 13.57 per cent may be 
classed as miscellaneous vegetable matter. This consists almost 
entirely of refuse eaten during the winter months, as coffee grounds, 
orange seeds, beans, parings of various fruits and vegetables, and 
similar material commonly found on garbage piles. Mast and 
various grass and weed seeds are also present in insignificantly small 
quantities. Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) and foxtail grass 
(ChsEiocMoa glauca) were most commonly found, and as the starling 
habitually feeds in fields and pastures containing an abundance of 
these two weeds, it is not sm-prismg that a few seeds are occasionally 
taken. 

The garbage eaten has no econom.ic significance, even so indirectly 
as the cutting down of the available food of native birds, as they 
seldom resort to such food. 

FOOD OF NESTLINGS. 

From an economic standpoint, the food habits of nestling passerine 
birds are, as a rule, more commendable than those of the adults, and 
when one considers that during the nestling period the young birds of 
many species outnumber the parents two to one, the importance of 
knowmg what they are capable of doing is manifest. Then, too, it 
must be remembered that the food required for the young growmg 
bird is vastly more than that needed for its parent. During the 
fu'st few days of the nestling's life, especially, it consumes enormous 
quantities of food, estimated in the case of some species to be on each 
day a mass equal to its own weight. This demand for food, much of 
which consists of injurious insects, is greatest during May, June, and 
July, a time when growing crops are benefited most by a suppression 
of their insect enemies. 



38 



BULLETIN 868, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



5^ 
1% 



(^1 



'I' <l! 

I'lU'l 
llilihl 


= 


i 




S! 



p% 



\Nx\\\\\\\\\N\v\\\\\^iii a 



^ 



t 



t 



I'lih 



X 



llkil 



i 









iliiii 









1,11 



11 1 










lllilnll 



'^^'^^^\^\\ ^\^^\\\s\\\\lll 



c7oay vt^/^//vt^ 



C7C?0^ ^7<ffl!<Z^Ojr/\ 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 



39 



Table II.— Monthly percentages of the various itons in the food of adult starlings {see 

fig- 2). 



ICind of food. 


Jan. 


Feb. 


Mar. 


Apr. 


May. 


June. 


July. 


Aug. 


Sept. 


Oct. 


Nov. 


Dec. 


Month- 
ly av- 
erages. 




14.10 
1.23 
0.14 
2.27 
4.42 
3.88 
0.44 

3.91 
1.69 

40.56 


20.16 
0.42 

0.49" 
0. .55 
1.04 
0.04 

3.07 
2.40 

35.97 


7.97 
1.07 
0.27 
2.39 
2.61 
5.24 
0.66 

6.23 
8.15 

41.25 


4.35 
7.31 
4.52 
6.55 
1.59 
5. .56 
54.69 

5.26 
1.39 

6.76 


4.31 
8.76 
11.04 
6.23 
0.84 
13.97 
42.19 

6.98 
0.63 

4.58 


7.39 
7.96 
3.28 
4.56 
1.24 
20.56 
23.66 

10.80 
0.32 

1.04 
17.01 
1.06 

1.12 


13.36 
9.11 
4.08 
3.70 
2.77 
4.57 
3.68 

5.71 
0.35 

1.49 
14.92 

35.82 
0.44 


10.91 
13.02 
0.45 
1.76 
22.30 
3.69 
0.20 

5. .56 
0.32 

0.34 


3.93 
12.93 
0..38 
0.75 
30. 75 
0.83 
4.11 

3.56 
0.54 


3.13 
4.56 
2.60 
1.15 
38.95 
2.16 
7.64 

11.83 
0.23 

3.61 


5.33 
1.16 
0.10 
2.27 
38.26 
5.69 
1.24 

3.01 


7.00 
1.12 
0.05 
5.54 
4.76 
5.26 
2.02 

5.05 
0.36 

26.62 


8.50 


Ground beetles 

May beetles 

Other beetles 

Grasshoppers 

Caterpillars 

Millipeds 


5.71 
2.24 
3.14 

12.41 
6.04 

11.71 


Miscellaneous ani- 
mal matter' 

Garbage (aiiimal).. 

Garbage (vege- 
table) 

Cultivated cherries 

Other cultivated 


5.93 
1.32 

13.67 
2.66 


5. 84 

19.98 
1.54 


0.66 

32.90 
2.30 


2.87 

13.69 
7.60 


0.76 

0.34 
0.92 


0.47' 


0.50 

40.88 
0.07 


2.19 

39.57 
0.46 


-0.38 
23.76 


0.96 

41.80 
0.18 


5.78 
36.44 


1.75 


Wild fruits 

Grain 


23.86 
1.16 







' Under this heading are included Hymenoptera, Hemiptera, Diptera, and other miscellaneous insects, 
spiders, and mollusKs. 

OBSERVATIONS FROM BLIND. 

Few birds are more voracious than young starlings, and when 
there are from 4 to 6 to feed, it requires the most strenuous efforts of 
their naturally active parents to supply their constant needs. An 
insight into the feeding operations was obtained near Closter, N. J., 
by means of a bhnd, from which a nestful of 5 young starlings could 
be watched at close range. This blind was so placed that the opening 
made for observation was within 2 feet of the nest cavity. This was 
located about 6 feet from the ground in the hollow limb of an apple 
tree. In watching these birds, attempt was made to identify the 
food brought in and to determme the frequency of feeding. 

Efforts at identification met with little success, as hi no case could 
an item be specifically identified, even though much of the food was 
carried in plam view at the tip of the bill of the parent bird and often 
within 18 inches of the eyes of the observer. The alertness of the 
bird prevented more than a momentary glance at the food it carried. 
Such identifications as "cutworms," ''earthworms," ''grasshoppers," 
and "ground beetles" were the best that could be made under the 
circumstances; and then, since fuUy a third of the food of the star- 
ling is carried where it is partially or wholly concealed at the base of 
the bill or m the tliroat, this phase of the observations afforded few 
facts of value — very little compared with the detailed data secured 
from stomach examination. It was noted, however, that rainfall had 
a distinct effect on the character of food brought to the young. Dur- 
ing showery weather or on days succeeding ramy nights large quan- 
tities of earthworms and cutworms were secured. The main source 
of this supply was a near-by garden. A low meadow was a favorite 



40 BULLETIN 8G8, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 

feeding ground during drier weather, and it was here that the biids 
secured most of their beetle food. 

Observations as to the frequency of feeding gave more satisfactory 
results. Although the starlmg is extremely cautious in its feeding 
operations, this characteristic was less pronounced in the pair used in 
this observation, owing to the fact that the nest was situated within a 
few feet of the crossing of two well-traveled roads, and frequently 
the parent birds would sit calmly in the tree while several vehicles 
and pedestrians would pass within 20 feet. Little concern was shown 
over the presence of the blind, but of the two birds the male was by 
far the more cautious and at times would be frightened away from 
the nest by some cause or other, thus delaying a feeding. It often 
happened that the female would make several feeding trips while the 
male was thus alarmed, and on one or two such occasions the female 
attacked her mate, after which he would obediently visit the nest 
and feed the young. 

In nine days a total of 390 feedings were recorded, m 14 periods 
varying in length from 30 minutes to 4 hours and 41 minutes. One 
hundred and four of the feedings were by the male and 286 by the 
female. An average of one feeding every 6.1 minutes was main- 
tained for the whole period of observation, 31 hours and 10 minutes. 
The highest rate was recorded on the morning of May 18, which was 
probably the seventh day of the nestlings' life. A feeding every 3.2 
minutes was maintamed for 4 hours and 41 mmutes. The lowest 
rate, once every 11.7 minutes, occurred on May 25, the day before the 
young left the nest. 

On the basis of one feeding every 6.1 minutes, and assuming that 
the young are fed 12 hours a day, which is conservative, there would 
be 118 feedings a day. As this brood left the nest on the sixteenth 
day, which is probably several days short of the normal nesthng 
period of the starling, for the birds were disturbed considerably during 
the latter days of their nestling life, a total of 1,888 feedings would 
have been given to this brood of five, or 377.6 for each nestling. 
When it is borne m mind that the parent birds would often bring in 
thi-ee or four cutworms, earthworms, or grasshoppers, or an equal 
bulk of miscellaneous insect food, at a single trip, one may gain an 
idea of the quantity of food required to develop a brood of young 
starlmgs. 

STOMACH EXAMINATION. 

For detailed study of food items an excellent series of 325 stomachs 
of nestlings, collected m Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey 
during May, June, and July, was available. Sixteen of these, how- 
ever, contained so little food that they could not be used in estimating 
percentages, leavmg 309 for such purposes. Nestluigs in all stages 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 41 

of growth, from the blind, callow young of a day or two to the husky, 
energetic fledglmg ready to leave the nest, are about equally repre- 
sented, with the result that the percentages of the various food items 
may be considered to be fair averages for the entire nestluig period. 
It is well known that as nesthngs grow older there is a gradual change 
in food preferences. A discussion of the change of food habits in 
the growing nestlings, based on this material, grouped accordmg to 
the age of the birds, will be found in Table III, on page 44. 

ANIMAL FOOD. 

Compared with the 338 stomachs of adult starlings collected in 
May and June, it is found that the percentage of animal matter eaten 
by nestlings is somewhat greater, 95.06 per cent in place of 82.36. 
By far the largest animal item consisted of caterpillars, which, along 
with a few moths and a cocoon or two, formed 38.21 per cent of the 
food of young starlings and were present in 274 of the 325 stomachs 
examined. 

To very young birds caterpillars are especially attractive. Only 
3 of the 79 nestlings estimated to be less than 6 days old had failed 
to eat these larvee. In the stomachs of 10 of these, caterpillars 
formed over three-fourths of the food, wliile the average for the lot 
was nearly half. In the case of two nestlings, apparently more 
than 10 days old, caterpillars formed the entire stomach content. 

A large part of the caterpillars eaten by the starling are cutworms, 
a fact which may be attributed to the bird's habit of searching for 
insect food on the gi'ound. Cutworms are chiefly nocturnal in 
their habits, but their high percentage in the food of young starlings 
indicates either that they are secured by the parents from beneath 
the surface or, which is likely, that a. part are picked up in the early 
morning hours before the insects have secreted themselves for the day. 

Beetles of various kinds constitute the next largest item (29.98 
per cent) in the food of nestlings, of which nearly half (14.58 per 
cent) are members of the family Scarab^idse, in which is found that 
notorious pest, the white grub, better known to the city dweller in 
its adult form, the May beetle (Phyllo])Jiaga) . During late May and 
early June adult May beetles are favorite items of food with young 
starlings. One brood of 4 nearly fledged young had been fed en- 
. tirely on these insects, at least 32 individuals being eaten, and another 
brood of 4 had eaten 27, which constituted 82 per cent of their food. 
As would be expected, the larvae of these beetles are seldom eaten 
unless the parent birds are securing food on newly plowed fields. 
A few other phytophagous scarabseids of the genera Euylioria, 
Ligyrus, Cotalpa, Anomala, Diplotaxis, and S erica also were eaten, 
but in no case were the insects of economic importance or the quan- 
tity taken worthy of note. Nestling starlings eat by no means as 



42 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

many coprophagous scarabaeids as do their parents, who, in late 
summer and in fall, capture numbers of the common small genera 
on the wing. Of these, Aphodius appears to be the favorite for the 
nestlings. 

Ground beetles (Carabidse) formed a little more than 8 per cent 
of the young starlings' food, a proportion about equal to that taken 
by the adults in May and June. They were found in two-thirds of 
the stomachs examined, but in only one case was the quantity taken 
more than half the stomach contents. Conspicuous among the 
distinctly beneficial carabids eaten is the fiery caterpillar hunter 
(Calosoma calidum). This insect was identified in 17 stomachs. 
The large HarjMlus caliginosus was present in 54 stomachs, CJilsenius 
tomentosus in 46, and members of the genus Aiiisodactylus in 76. 
The presence of a considerable number of the last-named genus, 
together with specimens of Amara, show that not all the ground 
beetles eaten should be charged against the starling, as some of them 
are distinctly vegetarian. 

The young starlings' consumption of weevils is nearly three times 
as great as that of the adults during the same period, and while in 
bulk the portion taken is small (3.26 per cent), it contains one item 
of considerable interest, the clover leaf weevil (Hypera punctata). 
(See PI. Ill, fig. 1.) This insect constituted by far the largest 
portion of the weevil food. It was present in 53 stomachs, and the 
larvae occurred in 34. One brood of 3 newly hatched young had 
been fed a total of 59 of these larvse, which, together mth 3 adult 
weevils of other genera, formed nearly 70 per cent of their food. 
The best record for the destruction of adult weevils was made by a 
brood of 4 half-grown nestlings that had consumed 30 individuals of 
two other clover pests (Sitona Mspidula and Phytonomus nigrirostris) 
along with a number of billbugs (Sphenophorus sp.). 

The remaining beetle food, comprising 4.11 per cent, was divided 
among a number of families. Leaf beetles (Chrysomelidse) and 
rove beetles (Staphylmidse) were best represented, but in no case 
was the quantity eaten of importance. 

As the nestling period is too early in the season to permit a heavy 
consumption of grasshoppers, a large part of the orthopterous remains 
found (1 1.31 per cent) was composed of crickets. These were present 
in 134 stomachs, frequently associated with a grasshopper or two. 
One brood of 4 young starlings about ready to leave the nest had 
eaten 19 crickets and 4 grasshoppers, which totaled over 81 per cent 
of the food; another brood, just hatched, had been fed 13 crickets 
and 7 grasshoppers, which formed over two-thirds of their diet; and 
in the case of two other broods of 4 and 5, respectively, the orthop- 
terous food constituted over two-thirds of the stomach contents. 
Most of the crickets eaten by nestlings are the common field cricket 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 43 

{Gryllus pennsylvanicus) , while many of the grasshoppers belong to 
the genus Melanoplus. 

There is nothing of particular interest in the remaining insect 
food of young starlings. None of the other orders were represented 
by as much as 1 per cent. Among the Hymenoptera eaten, ants 
were prominent, and of the Hemiptera, soldier bugs (Pentatomidse) 
formed the greater part. 

Of animal items other than insects, spiders are most conspicuous. 
They were present in 182 of the 325 nestling stomachs examined 
and formed 8.56 per cent of the food, compared with 1.28 per cent of 
that of adults for the same period. Spidere are especially acceptable 
to nestlings of a day or two, as their thin-walled stomachs are unable 
to assimilate hard food. These creatm'es were found in the stomachs 
of 71 of 79 starlings less than 6 days old, and brood after brood was 
found in which every individual had been given one or more spiders. 
In some instances upward of a hundred were found when an egg 
sac filled with young spiders had been swallowed. A large part of 
the spiders eaten belong to the family Lycosidse, the wolf spiders, 
which are terrestrial in habit and are generally considered less bene- 
ficial than those species which construct webs for the capture of 
flying insect pests. 

The greatest difference between the food habits of old and young 
starlings is in the quantity of millipeds eaten. These form nearly a 
third (32.95 per cent) of the sustenance of the adult birds during 
May and June, but less than a twentieth (4.56 per cent) of the food 
of the young. In the frequency also of feeding on milhpeds the 
nestling lags behind its parent. About 52 per cent of the nestlmg 
starlings were fed on millipeds, while fully 78 per cent of the adults 
had taken such food during the same time. It would seem, then, 
that the parent birds in their search for food for the young either 
deliberately pass up many a milliped or else devour them themselves 
as they proceed. 

Nothing of importance appeared in the remaining miscellaneous 
animal matter, which formed less than 1 per cent of the food. 

VEGETABLE FOOD. 

Of the vegetable food consumed, cultivated cherries are the only 
item of importance. This fruit was eaten by 30 of the 325 nestlings 
collected and formed 3.18 per cent of the food, as compared with 
8.01 per cent for adults during the same period. Most of the cherries 
eaten by the nestlings are brought to them the last few days they 
are in the nest, when they have acquired a dietary very similar to 
that of their parents. During this short time, however, a hungry 
brood of 5 or 6 can make away with considerable fruit. A nest box 
which had been occupied by only one brood near Closter, N, J., con- 



44 



BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 



tained 114 stones of cultivated cherries when cleaned on July 11. 
The economic significance of the starling's taste for cherries is fully 
discussed under the food of the adults, on pages 26 to 28. 

The remaining vegetable food, less than 2 per cent, is composed 
largely of rubbish. Mere traces of corn, oats, and wheat were present 
in a few stomachs. 



FOOD PREFERENCES AT DIFFERENT AGES. 

In order to reveal the changes that take place in the food prefer- 
ences of the nestlmg starling from the time it receives its first meal 
to the time it is ready to leave the nest and shift for itself, the nest- 
lings' stomachs were arranged in three groups, representing as nearly 
as possible the first, second, and third periods of nestling life. These 
groups include, approximately, -(1) birds from 1 to 5 days old; (2) 
those 6 to 10 days old; and (3) all above 10 days of age. Each group 
was well represented, there being 79, 94, and 122 stomachs, respec- 
tively. Fourteen additional nestling stomachs on hand could not be 
used, as definite data concernmg their age was lacking. The infor- 
mation derived from the regrouping of this material is i^resented in 
condensed form in Table III and graphically represented in figure 3. 

Tasle III.- — Monthly percentages of various hinds of food eaten by nestling starlings, 
showing the changing character at different ages (see Jig. 3). 



Age of nestlings. ^^^^^ 


May 

beetles, 

etc. 


Wee- 
vils. 


Grass- 
hoppers 
and 

crick- 
ets. 


Cater- 
pillars. 


Milli- 
peds. 


Spiders. 


Miscel- 
laneous 
animal 
matter. 


Cher- 
ries. 


Miscel- 
laneous 
vege- 
table 
matter. 


1 to 5 days '. 


2.43 
11.59 
7.69 


3.91 
18.33 
18.25 


5.59 
4.49 
1.02 


13.96 
11.23 
8.98 


45.26 
34.88 
37.81 


1.48 
5.34 
6.38 


23.44 
3.57 
3.28 


2.98 
5.93 
7.61 


0.18 
3.36 
4.76 


0.77 


6 to 10 days 

10 or more days 


1.28 
4.22 



It will be noticed that as the bird grows older there is a decrease 
in its consumption of soft and easily digested foods. The bulk of 
spiders eaten, for instance, is confined to the first few days of the 
bkd's life. In the case of caterpillars the decrease is not uniform, 
although it is apparent that the very voung birds are fed more than 
those a little older. There is also a gradual lessenmg in the quantity 
of crickets and grasshoppers taken. Under the headmg ''weevils" 
a similar decrease is recorded, but instead of the hard-shelled adults 
being so popular with young starlings, it is the larvae of the clover 
leaf weevil which forms the bulk of the food. In the case of ground 
beetles and May beetles, as well as with millipeds, the younger nest- 
lings are given smaller quantities. The same is true for the principal 
vegetable item, cultivated cherries. Only two of the 79 starlings 
less than 6 davs old had been fed such fruit. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 



45 



From the foregoing detailed account of tlie food of nestling star- 
lings and the comparisons made with the food hahits of the parent 
birds at the same time of year, it is apparent that the habits of the 
young materially raise the starling's economic status m the early 
summer months. In the consumption of destructive caterpillars, 
crickets and grasshoppers, and scarabseid beetles, three of the favor- 
ite food items of starlings, the young birds excel, and in the destruc- 






C?aySCP/ 







1 Cy<3/<syyO///a>/^^ 









Fig. 3. — C:hart of food of 295 nestling starlings, showing its changing rharacter during the three stages of 
nestling life. In Table III, page 44, the same information is presented in percentages. Exphniatory 
remarks on both chart and table are given on page 44. 

tion of beneficial gromid beetles and cultivated cherries they are not 
so culpable as their parents. Correlated with this demonstrated su- 
periority in food habits are the facts that, bird for bird, nestlings con- 
sume more food than adults and that in the case of the starlmg they 
outnumber the adults two to one. Confronted with such an array 
of favorable testimony the worth of the young starlmg can be scarcely 
overestimated. 



46 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

RELATION TO OTHER SPECIES OF BIRDS. 

The antagonism between starlings and other birds constitutes one 
of the most frequently heard complaints against this species. This 
is especially true in thickly settled regions where the natural nesting 
sites of hole-nesting birds have been largely replaced with artificial 
ones in the form of bird boxes. This fact in itself has a tendency to 
bring to human attention most of such conflicts, as many of the bird 
boxes are in dooryards where they are under more or less constant 
observation. It must also be borne in mind that the drivmg out of 
native species which have been induced by enthusiastic bird lovers 
to take up sites in the dooryard, will be more keenly felt than the 
molestmg of breedmg birds at a greater distance from the house and 
with which there has been less intimate acquaintance. 

Wliile particular attention was given to this complamt during the 
breeding season, little antagonism was actually observed. However, 
as acts of vandalism last for just a moment or two, it is not surprising 
that more instances were not noted. It is apparent, then, from the 
nature of the case that data of this kmd must be secured largely 
from the notes of reliable observers. Those who have had the for- 
tune to witness such activities report that bluebirds and flickers suffer 
most, but martins, house wrens, robins, English sparrows, and a few 
other wild species, as well as domestic pigeons, are also bothered in 
their nestmg operations. 

Unrelenting perseverence dominates the starling's activities when 
engaged in a controversy over a nestmg site. More of its battles 
are won by dogged persistence in aiuioying its victim than by bold 
aggression, and its irritating tactics are sometimes carried to such a 
point that it seems almost as if the bird were actuated more by a 
morbid pleasure of annoymg its neighbors than by any necessity 
arismg from a scarcity of nestmg sites. Illustrative of this are the 
experiences of a pair of bluebirds observed at Norwalk, Comi., build- 
ing a nest in a cavity high in an ehn tree. On April 8 two starlings 
were seen sittmg nearby, whistlmg and squealmg. They were not 
noted attackmg the bluebirds, but the next afternoon the bluebirds 
had disappeared and the starlmgs were carrying nest material into 
the cavity. The next day the bluebirds tried to get into a wren box 
havmg an openmg too small for their passage. A day or two later 
four bird boxes were erected in the vicinity, and the bluebirds prompt- 
ly began to build in one. This apparently aroused the displeasure of 
the starlmgs; so they entered the box and removed the nest material. 
The same performance was repeated at two of the other boxes, and it 
was not until the bluebirds had taken up the last box, which was 
provided with a l|-incli opening, through which the starlings could 
not pass, that they were able to lay a set of eggs. That misfortune 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 47 

still attended the bluebirds was disclosed one morning when the male 
was found dead beneath the nest and the eggs were deserted by the 
female. There was no evidence, however, to connect the starlings 
with the final disaster. Additional reliable evidence of bluebirds 
being driven out by starlings was secured at Norwalk, Wilton, and 
West Cornwall, Conn.; Groton, Mass.; Medford, Long Island, N. Y.; 
and Adelphia, N. J. 

In contrast with such actions was the situation presented in an 
orchard at Norfolk, Coim., not far from the scene just described. 
Here a pair of bluebirds and two pairs of starlings conducted their 
family affairs peaceably in close proximity to each other. At Hart- 
ford, Conn., a pair of bluebirds and three pairs of starlings nested in 
natural cavities in apple trees located in two adjacent city lots. The 
owner of the property said he had watched the birds closely and did 
not see any evidence of antagonism between the species. 

In contests with the flicker the starling frequently makes up in 
nmnbers what disadvantage it may have in size. Typical of such 
combats was the one observed on May 9, at Hartford, Conn., where a 
group of starlings and a flicker were in controversy over a newly 
excavated nest. The number of starlings varied, but as many as 6 
were noted at one time. Attention was first attracted to the dispute 
by a number of starlings in close proximity to the hole and by the 
sounds of a tussle within. Presently a flicker came out dragging a 
starling after him. The starling continued the battle outside long 
enough to allow one of its comrades to slip into the nest. Of course 
the flicker had to repeat the entire performance. He did this for 
about half an hour, when he gave up, leaving the starlings in posses- 
sion of the nest. 

On June 19, at Port Chester, N. Y., a controversy was observed be- 
tween a pair of starlings and a pair of flickers, whose brood was about 
to leave the nest, which was about 30 feet from the ground and witliin 
25 feet of a house. Wlien first observed one of the starlings was 
perched a few feet from the nest, in the entrance to which was one of 
the fhckers. Whenever this flicker relaxed its vigilance for a moment 
one of the starlings would immediately make a dart for the nest 
opening. A scuffle would ensue in v/hich both flicker and starling- 
would come tumbling to the ground and a few feathers would fly. In 
the meantime the other flicker and starlmg v/ould take up the wait- 
ing game in the tree top. Tins condition had prevailed for several 
days, and after a day or two more of continuous conflict the fficker 
succeeded in bringing forth its brood unharmed. The nest cavity 
was not then taken over by the starlmgs. 

At Gwynedd Valley, Pa., an observer told of the killmg of two 
broods of yomig flickers hatched in a tree in liis dooryard. He had 
prevented the starlings from nesting in this cavity by repeated shoot- 



48 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

ing early in spring, but was unable to prevent the destruction of the 
yoimg flickers, wliich were killed by being dragged from the nest and 
dropped to the ground. At Closter, N. J., a similar conflict was re- 
ported in 1915, but in the following year the tables were reversed, 
for, in a dispute over a nest box only a few rods from the site of the 
flicker tragedy of the former year, a starling engaged in a struggle for 
a nest box met its death, apparently in a battle w^ith a flicker. That 
less serious outcomes sometimes result from starling-flicker feuds 
was indicated by circumstantial evidence at a point near Hopewell 
Junction, N. Y. A brood of starlings was occupying a nest cavity 
recently excavated by flickers in accordance with the approved princi- 
ples of flicker architecture, the entrance being on the lower side of 
the limb, protected from drainage. In a neighboring tree was found 
a brood of 6 half-gro^vn fhckers located in a natural cavity, similar 
to ones often chosen by starlings, a hollow limb with the entrance 
exposed upwards and with an opening full 5 inches in diameter. All 
circumstances seemed to indicate that the birds had simply exchanged 
nesting sites. Additional reliable evidence of the starlmg's aggres- 
sive tactics against fhckers, some of which involved the killing of 
yoimg as well as the usurping of nest sites, came in reports from 
Hartford, Norwalk (2), West Cornwall, and Portland, Conn.; Woods- 
town and Adelphia, N. J. ; and Ambler and Maple Glen, Pa. 

Purple martins suffer to only a limited extent from the starling's 
demand for nest sites. Throughout Connecticut and much of north- 
eastern New Jersey the martin is not an abimdant bird, so while 
houses put up for martins in various localities were usually occupied 
by starlings and English sparrows, there was little chance of their 
having been tenanted with martins, even had they not been occupied 
by the foreigners. One martin house at Norwalk, Conn,, was oc- 
cupied by a pair of sparrow hawks on one side and three pairs of 
starlings on the other. At Hadlyme, Conn,, a colony of fully 50 
pairs of martins conducted unmolested their nesting operations ui^der 
the close scrutiny of starlings that nested near by. An observer from 
Adelphia, N. J,, reported that he had witnessed an attack on martins 
in his yard. He had erected two martin houses of fo'ur compartments 
each early in the year. One was occupied by starlings, and when a 
pair of martins appeared and attempted to take up the other abode 
a fight occurred. A starling was observed going into the martin 
house, and after pulling out one of the inmates dragged out the nest 
material. The martin was subsequently attacked whenever it ap- 
proached and it finally left the premises. In' this and in another 
case at Adelphia the martins had come to the boxes for the first time. 

The two most specific reports received, bearing on the relation of 
starlings to wrens, are conflicting. In one, at Norwalk, Conn,, a 
pair of starlings flew to a wren's nest, and pulled the bird out and 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STAKLING. 49 

killed it; wliile in the other, at Ambler, Pa., 11 pairs of wrens 
nested in peace in a yard of about an acre, although starlings were 
common in the breeding season. 

The single record of starlings attacking a red-headed woodpecker 
comes from Baltimore, Md., where a combat was observed over a 
nest cavity in a telephone pole. 

That the aggressions of starlings are not entirely restricted to 
attacks on hole-nesting species is apparent from the fact that after 
bluebirds and flickers, robins seem to be the birds most frequently 
molested. Although no observation of this kind was made by the 
investigators, reliable evidence has come from outside sources. At 
Ambler, Pa., two nestling robins were killed by starlings, the victims 
being dispatched by powerful pecks on the head. At East Norwalk, 
Conn., a starling was seen to peck and break all the eggs in a robin's 
nest. At the bird sanctuary at Fairfield, Comi., the remains of a 
robin's nest destroyed by starlings was seen, the caretaker witness- 
ing this act of vandalism; after the robins had rebuilt the structure 
it was again destroyed, presumably by starlings. Other corrobora- 
tive evidence on this point was secured at Gwynedd and ^Spring 
House, Pa.; Adelphia, N. J.; Southampton, N. Y.; and Hadlyme, 
Comi. Single attacks on a Baltimore oriole's nest and the young of 
a cliipping sparrow were reported. 

It was an almost miiversal observation throughout Connecticut 
and New Jersey that the English sparrow is decreasing in numbers, 
and many persons attribute this to the starling. No belligerent acts 
between these two species, however, were witnessed in the field, 
though several instances of the usurping of the nesting or roosting 
places of English sparrows by starlings have been reported. In a 
number of cases these two species were observed breeding in close 
proximity, and under one water tank their nests almost touched. 

A few instances of starlings attacking domestic pigeons were re- 
ported. At Middletown, R. I., it was found necessary to wage con- 
stant warfare on the starlings to keep them from nesting in one pigeon 
loft, where they appropriated for their own domestic affairs the boxes 
put up for the pigeons. They carried in so much material that they 
filled the boxes and on one or two occasions dragged it in so rapidly 
as actually to barricade the setting pigeons, which were entirely 
unresisting. At Closter, N. J., it was reported that starlings had 
entered a pigeon loft, driven out the adults, and then,^ cbagging out 
the squabs, had let them fall to the ground, where they were killed. 
Opposing testimony was presented from experiences on a squab farm 
at Stanton, N. J. Here the starlings nested peaceably along with 
the pigeons and the only trouble that the latter had occurred during 
cold weather, when starlings in considerable numbers used the coops 



50 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

for roosting places. Whenever a lantern was brought into the build- 
ing at night the starlings flew about in great commotion and, fright- 
ening the pigeons, caused some of the setting birds to leave their eggs. 
Starlings were reported on occasions to have driven pigeons even from 
church towers. At Norwalk, Conn., and Newburgh, N. Y., however, 
towers were found where pigeons were successfully raising young in 
the immediate presence of roosting starlings. 

To determine whether a mere scarcity of nesting sites is the cause 
of the antagonism between starlings and other species, 24 nest boxes 
were erected, 12 in the vicinity of Closter, N. J., and 12 about Nor- 
walk, Conn. These boxes were of a size commonly provided for 
flickers, measuring approximately 4f by 5f by 16 inches (interior 
dimensions) and fitted with a 24^-inch hole, and so constructed that the 
nests could be readily inspected by means of a removable front. 
In some of these boxes the size of the hole was reduced by tacking 
on the front small boards containing circular openings, some If 
inches and some 1 f inches in diameter. These were used to determine 
the smallest opening through which a starling can pass. The boxes 
were occupied readily both by starlings and bluebirds; in most cases 
this was not due to a lack of natural nesting sites, as there were many 
to be had. In one orchard a pair of starlings showed such a marked 
preference for a natural cavity that they raised two broods therein, 
although 3 boxes were in the immediate vicinity, unoccupied at the 
time their nest was started. Following is a summary of what trans- 
pired at the 24 boxes: 

Four boxes failed to have any bird activity connected with them; 
IS had starling nests started; 14 had starling nests completed; 10 
had starling eggs hatched (in 3 other instances the eggs were removed) ; 
8 had bluebird nests started, four of which produced young; and 1 
had a completed nest of house wrens. 

None of the 6 bo^es with If -inch opening was occupied by star- 
lings; 5 of 7 boxes with If -inch opening were occupied by starlings; 
10 of 13 boxes with 2^-inch opening were similarly occupied; and at 
3 boxes bluebirds were driven away by starlings. 

In summarizing the evidence bearing on the relation between the 
starling and our native birds during the breeding season, it is apparent 
that the bluebird and flicker suffer most. Both have no doubt to a 
certain extent been driven away from the vicinity of the dooryard. 
Regarding: the seriousness of these attacks and the ultimate conse- 
quences to the population of the species it is believed the fears of many 
bird lovers are exaggerated. While instances such as those cited 
are numerous and often have resulted fatally to the birds attacked 
it must be borne in mind that this information is the compilation 
of more than six months' constant investigation, during which time 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 51 

no opportunity to secure data on this point was overlooked. Blue- 
birds are common and generally distributed in the sections thickly 
settled with starlings, and although observers have noted their dis- 
appearance in small areas confined to a dooryard or two, it is the 
opinion of those who are qualified to judge the general abundance of 
these birds that in Connecticut and northeastern New Jersey blue- 
birds have either held their own or increased in numbers in the last 
few years. Since bluebirds will continue to nest commonly in locali- 
ties away from human habitation where they have little to fear from 
starlings, and since even in the dooryard, their nests, eggs, and 
young may be protected by providing nest boxes having an opening 
no greater than Ih inches in diameter, there is little danger of the race 
as a whole being placed in jeopardy. 

The flicker also will be driven from the vicinity of houses, but it, 
too, will always find a refuge in wilder situations to which the starling 
seldom goes. In those parts of Connecticut, New York, and New 
Jersey where the starling has been a common bird and in competition 
with the flicker for at least 15 years the latter still maintains as con- 
spicuous a place in the bird world as it does in other parts of these 
States where the starling is not yet common. The same can be said 
of the robin, which in northeastern New Jersey and along the Connec- 
ticut shore is an extremely abundant bird. Martins are more abun- 
dant in western, central, and southern New Jersey than in the center 
of starling population, but such a condition of relative abundance 
existed before the advent of the starling, and it can not be construed 
as a result of starling aggression. Neither can the apparent decrease 
in the English sparrow population throughout New Jersey and parts 
of New England in the last 10 years be correlated with the spread 
of the starling, as in many sections where the decrease of the sparrow 
has been noted the starling has not yet arrived in numbers. As for 
the other species at present known to be attacked by starlings, the 
acts of vandalism are so occasional that the effect is negligible and the 
situation is by no means as serious as that presented by the predatory 
habits of the "blue jay, the grackle, or the crow,. 

A consideration of the economic significance of cUsplacing certain 
native species by the starling involves judgment of the relative 
worth of the various species. A comparison of the merits of the 
starling %\nth those of its breeding competitors reveals that it is 
certainly more valuable than the robin, flicker, or English sparrow; 
that it has food habits fully as favorable as those of the house wi-en; 
and that the bluebird and martin are the only species with wliich 
the starling is in intimate competition whose economic worth might 
be considered greater than that of the starling. 



52 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Field observation sheds some light on the added competition for 
food imposed upon native species by the presence of the starling. 
During the breeding season, robins in suburban sections and meadow- 
larks in the more open country are the species thrown most intimately 
in contact with the newcomer. The robin finds its customarv^ supply 
of cutworms in the garden reduced by the diligent search of the star- 
ling; earthworms, a favorite food of the robin in wet weather, also are 
taken by the starling, but the supply of these appears to be ample 
for both. In the case of the meadowlark, such items as cutworms, 
clover leaf weevils, and other beetles constitute the food supply 
most frequently sought by both species. 

After the breeding season the starling comes in competition with 
several additional species in its search for food. In feeding on 
meadow and pasture land, its closest associate is the cowbird, and 
a mixed flock of these two species is a common sight about dairy herds. 
Contrary to expectation, however, the food habits of the two do not 
seriously conflict at that time of year. A comparison of the stomach 
contents of cowbirds and starlings secured from the same flocks 
showed that while starlings were feeding most heavily on grasshoppers 
and crickets, cowbirds were satisfying themselves largely by picking 
up seeds of ragweed and foxtail grass. Similar conditions existed 
in mixed flocks of starlings, red-winged blackbirds, and grackles 
roaming through cornfields. Ripening corn formed the major por- 
tion of the food of the red-wings and grackles, while starlings ate 
comparatively little. Probably the greatest influence exerted by 
the starling on the food supply of other birds is occasioned by its 
consumption of wild fruit diu-ing late summer and early fall. Wild 
cherry and sour gum trees heavily laden with fruit are soon stripped 
when a flock of several hundred starlings feeds continually in the 
vicinity, and, although the total supply of this food is enormous, 
instances were observed where locally such birds as robins, catbirds, 
and cedar waxwings were compelled to seek other sources of food. 
During winter starlings secure a certain portion of the food formerly 
eaten by English sparrows, especially about dumping* grounds of 
cities. Where bird lovers have taken pains to attract native species 
they have often found the foreigner greecUly consuming all the food 
they could supply, with the result that the cost of attracting birds 
rose almost to a prohibitive point. 

Here again must judgment be given on the relative worth of the 
species concerned before the seriousness of the starhng's consumption 
of the former food supply of other birds can be understood. After 
carefuUy weighing all the evidence available, it is safe to state that 
in the area covered by this investigation the starling is economically 
the superior of the robin, the catbird, the red-wing, the grackle, the 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 53 

cowbird, or the English sparrow, and that in tliis .ompetition for food 
the meadowlark is the only species whose added difficulty in sustain- 
ing itself is to be deplored. 

NATURAL ENEMIES. 

Very little evidence is at hand regarding the natural enemies of the 
starling. At Norwalk, Conn., a cat was seen carrying a freshly 
caught fledgling; and it is probable that a number are thus captured, 
as cats are numerous in the whole region. Far more robins, catbirds, 
and other birds are destroyed^ in this manner, however, for starlings 
are better protected in the nest and are also able to fly better when 
they leave the nest than are many of our common native birds. 

Hawks were several times noted flying \\'ith or about flocks of star- 
lings without attempting to capture any of them. At Bay Shore, 
N. Y., a curious performance was noted on three successive after- 
noons. A pair of sparrow hawks used the dead tops of several large 
locust trees as a lookout point for their hunting. Late in the after- 
noons the starlings appeared in this locality on their way to roost. 
As they passed, the sparrow hawks darted out, apparently in pursuit, 
but they never struck a bird. Instead, both the starling flock and 
sparrow hawks went through a series of intricate evolutions, appar- 
ently alternating in the r61e of pursuer and pursued. Occasionally 
the performance would be varied by a starling swooping down on a 
hawk as it perched on a limb, driving it oft": then followed the same 
evolutions as when the hawk was the aggressor. 

At Freehold, N. J., a sharp-shinned hawk was seen diving into a 
tree full of young starlings, but the latter, rushing to the center of 
the thick foliage, escaped harm. At Glen Cove, N. Y., a Cooper 
hawk was observed to dart from a tree into a passing flock of starlings 
and, striking one, to carry it away. A young starling was found also 
in a nest of a Cooper hawk at Wilton, Conn. These instances are 
enough to show that the birds of prey have learned to take their toll 
from the newcomer, but give little basis for any estimate as to their 
effect in checking its increase and spread. 

Many of the starlings collected were heavily infested with intestinal 
parasites, but no evidence was secured as to the effect these might 
have on the mortality of the birds. 

Cold weather seems to have some effect in checking the increase of 
starlings as in the vicinity of winter roosts it is common to find dead 
birds. This is particularly true in northern New Jersey, the region of 
their greatest abundance. 



54: BUULiETIN 8G8, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

ERADICATION OF ROOSTS. 

Soon after the first brood of starlings begins to leave the nest, some- 
times as early as the middle of June, one may find these birds resort- 
ing to nightly roosts (see pp. 11-13). These may be in trees or in 
church towers, barn cupolas, sheds, etc.; but up to the advent of 
cold weather the greatest number of starlings gather in tree roosts. 
Frequently these are established in the residential sections of cities, 
where the noise in the evening and early morning, with the attendant 
filth and odor from their droppings, makes the starlings most unwel- 
come birds. But by no means all of theL,nuisance should be attributed 
to starhngs, as in most roosts of any size grackles, robins, English 
sparrows, cowbirds, red-winged blackbirds, and even purple martins 
help to swell the numbers. Plainfield, Newark, Orange, Montclair, 
and Glen Ridge, N. J.; Greenwich, Fairfield, and Hartford, Conn.; 
Glen Cove, N. Y. ; and Germantown and Ambler, Pa., are a few of 
the places where roosts, in wliich starlings formed a large part of the 
assemblage, have proved to be a distinct nuisance. 

The roost encountered at Orange, N. J., is a typical one. Here, as 
in many other instances, the birds had selected tall elms and maples 
overhanging roadways and dooryards. When visited on July 15, 
1916, the ground beneath the larger trees was whitened with excre- 
ment. Feathers from the molting birds and the bodies of those that 
had died littered the ground, and the offensive odor arising, espe- 
cially in humid weather, permeated the whole neighborhood. 

Tliis roost was occupied by starlings, gracldes, and a few hundred 
robins. Observations made on the incoming birds indicated that the 
ratio between the number of starlings and grackles was about 3 to 2. 
During the early evening starlings greatly predominated, but as d"ark- 
ness deepened the proportion of gracldes increased, wliile the last to 
enter the roost were robins. On July 17, during four minutes at the 
height of the influx (6.56 to 7 p. m.) 900 birds entered the roost from 
the south, and on the following night, during a period of 38 minutes, 
3,100 were noted coming from the same direction. From these and 
other observations it was estimated that the roost was occupied by 
from 6,000 to 8,000 birds. During the entire process of assembling, 
the birds that were already gathered kept up an incessant din — 
the starlings with their variety of wliistles and rasping notes and the 
gracldes with their monotonous "checks" and unmusical squeaking 
calls. The clamor gradually lessened as darkness came, but a few of 
the birds might be heard at odd times all through the night. At the 
peep of day the gathered thousands would break out with a vol- 
ume of song that terminated abruptly the slumbers of all light sleep- 
ers in the vicinity. This accomplished, the birds would depart rather 
suddenly on their daily search for food. 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 55 

In previous years residents of the vicinity had undertaken meas- 
ures, more or less feeble, to remove the objectionable birds. Some 
of these afforded temporary relief. Roman candles shot on one or 
two nights drove the birds away for a short time. Three incan- 
descent lamps placed in a tree in the center of the roost gave relief 
to that immediate vicinity. The ringing of a bell placed in another 
tree sei-ved to drive away the birds in the early morning hours and 
shorten their annoying daybreak serenade, and a httle desultory 
shooting also had been done, but with no lasting results. 

Operations with a view of testing some of these methods of roost 
eradication were begun on July 17, at the Orange roost. A shotgun 
was used in the early evening, and when darkness arrived a number 
of Roman candles were discharged. Five successive nights of attack 
removed the roost. During these operations two observations of 
importance in connection with roost eradication were made. One 
was that the firing of a gun early in the evening, just as the birds are 
coming to roost, makes a more effective impression than one fired 
after the colony has settled for the night. When there is still day- 
light the frightened birds will fly for some chstance before alighting, 
while later in the evening the birds move onl}^ a few yards from their 
former perch. It was also noted that in a mixed roost adult star- 
lings were the first to take flight and young starlings were next to 
leave; grackles were less easily driven away, wliile robins were prac- 
ticaUy fearless, few of them leaving the roost even after five nights 
of attack. The relief obtained, however, was but temporary. In 
about 10 days the birds, not being further molested, reoccupied the 
roost. On August 24, a second attempt was made to drive them 
out, and after 6 nights' shooting they left, not to return that season. 

On the last 6 nights of September a starling-grackle-robin roost at 
Freehold, N. J., was attacked with the shotgun only and com- 
pletely removed. The birds apparently chose a new roosting place 
at some distance from Freehold, for when the roost had been eradi- 
cated, comparatively few starlings could be found in the daytime 
anywhere in the country surrounding the town, where previously 
they had been common. 

A single night's shooting at a roost composed entirely of starlings 
at Fairfield, Conn., during wliich 40 of the birds were kiUed, gave the 
desired results. 

A roost at Montclair, N. J., had been a source of considerable 
trouble for several years and measures had been taken to eradicate 
it. Roman candles had no effect, but four men using shotguns loaded 
with blank cartridges for tln'ee consecutive nights succeeded in driv- 
ing the birds away. However, they moved to a point in Glen Ridge, 
N. J., where they became equally troublesome. 



56 BULLETIN 868, V. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Experiments were made by the municipal authorities of Montchiir 
in 1916 to determine the usefulness of a sticky substance applied to 
the branches of the trees of the roost. This had no apparent effect 
in deterring the birds, although six or seven trees near the center of 
the roost had their branches well smeared with it. The sticky, 
resinous gum used was applied with small paddles, the climbers using 
a boatswain's chair to reach the upper and outer branches. As in 
several other cases the shotgun had to be used to bring relief. 

At Hartford, Conn., several years ago, a roost of about 5,000 star- 
lings and grackles was established on one of the principal residential 
streets, where it became such a nuisance that the city authorities 
took measures to remove it. Objection to the use of a shotgun was 
made by local bird lovers, who volunteered to drive the birds away 
by firing Roman candles. Three nights' work, in which from 3 to 
15 men armed with Roman candles participated, removed the roost. 

From present experiences it is apparent that neither the shotgun 
nor the Roman candle, however, effects a lasting cure. Each one, 
when used persistently, has served to remove roosts, but in either 
case vigilance must be used to prevent the birds from reesta))lishing 
themselves. In a few instances, as at Hartford, Roman candles did 
the work effectively, but at other roosts such measures have failed. 
A shotgun loaded with black powder shells, fired on 5 or 6 consecu- 
tive evenings, will give more certain results. Such treatment can 
be recommended for eradicating tree roosts of starlings and grackles 
wherever State and local laws permit. 

Starling roosts located in church towers, where they have some- 
times become a nuisance on account of the attending filth, can be 
abolished by the use of wire screen of a mesh of 1| inches or less. 
This method is almost universally resorted to in places thickly popu- 
lated with starlings. 

CONTROL MEASURES. 

Outside of the work done on roosts and the activities of caretakers 
of a few bird preserves, few efforts toward reducing the numbers of 
starlings have been made, but mention of some of these may be useful 
to those desiring to control the birds where they are injurious either 
to crops or buildings. 

One fact connected with the behavior of starlings brought out re- 
peatedly in field work is that the birds are'^easily frightened by gun- 
fire and soon become exceedingly wary. A few gunshots are usually 
sufficient to drive them away from the vicinity of crops upon which 
they are feeding. This is especially true when they are eating 
cherries. 

Wliere starlings become objectionable about dooryards by reason 
of the filth connected with their breeding operations, their activities 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 57 

may be curtailed by closing all cavities which might be used for 
nests, or reducing the diameter of the entrances to 1| inches or less. 
Wliile wholesale destruction of these birds, where extermination of 
the species in this country is the object sought, can not be recom- 
mended, occasion may arise where local overabundance will accen- 
tuate some of the injurious habits of the species, and make a reason- 
able reduction in their numbers justifiable. Raids on their fall and 
winter roosts appear to be effective means of accomplishing this. 
In church towers, especially, large numbers may be easily captured 
at night. No poisoning method appears practicable in winter, but 
trapping has met with moderate success on bird preserves. An ordi- 
nary screen ash-shifter propped up on one side with a stick was used 
to advantage in one case, and after baiting the area below it, the trap 
was sprung by pulling a string attached to the supporting stick. 

LEGISLATION. 

The popular attitude toward the starling has been reflected in 
State game laws. In all States where the bird is present even in 
moderate numbers it has been placed in the list, of exceptions to pro- 
tection. These States are Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, 
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
Delaware, and Maryland. In Maine, where, in the extreme south- 
western corner, a few starlings have appeared, these birds have been 
given protection, subject, however, to a provision in the State game 
laws whereby any birds or mammals (save beavers) may be killed 
when destroying crops. 

SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE. 

FOOD HABITS. 

The food habits of a bird are of paramount importance in deter- 
mining its desirability, and in the case of the starling knowledge on 
this subject is available from evidence revealed from a larger series 
of stomachs apparently than any heretofore used in the investigation 
of the food habits of a single species, supported by extensive field 
observation in areas in this country where the species is most abun- 
dant. Following are the more important findings: 

As an effective destroyer of terrestrial insects, including such pests 
as cutworms, grasshoppers, and weevils, the starling has few equals 
among the bird population of the northeastern United States. 

The most serious objection to the starling on economic grounds arises 
from its destruction of cherries. When its work is combined with that 
of the robin, which is fully as destructive and much less easily fright- 
ened, the chances for a successful crop of cherries, especially of early 
varieties, are poor. 



58 BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

The starling's work on apples is confined largely to isolated trees 
and to small, old orchards. Late varieties suffer more than those 
which mature at a time when there is still a great abundance of 
wild black cherries available. In the aggregate the apple damage 
is not great and is practically absent in young, well kept, produc- 
tive orchards. Injury to peaches and pears is negligible, and the 
damage to grapes is at present confined to small arbore — the large 
vineyards suffering very little. 

Contrary to the opinion of many farmers, especially in New Jersey, 
the starling secures an extremely small portion of its sustenance 
from either sweet or field corn. Its association with the actual 
depredators of cornfields, the red-winged blackbirds and grackles, 
accounts for its reputation. It is true that the starling, especially 
in the vicinity of roosts, does inflict some damage on corn, but com- 
pared with that done by the other species named this is very little. 
Its damage to small grain is negligible. 

In the small city or suburban garden the starling's fondness for 
green stuff" in spring and early summer has been the cause of some 
complaint, but in large truck-crop sections, where the bulk of such 
produce is raised, the aggregate loss is trivial. 

An idea of the economic significance of the starling's food habits 
is gained by comparison with the food habits of certam well-known 
native birds, with some of which it frequently associates. A thorough 
consideration of the evidence at hand indicates that, based on food 
habits, the adult starling is the economic superior of the robin, 
catbird, flicker, red-winged blackbird, or grackle. It is primarily a 
feeder on insects and wild fruit — less than 6 per cent of its yearly 
food being secured from cultivated crops. What damage it does 
inflict is due not so much to the character of its food habits as to the 
fact that the flocking habit has allowed some minor trait to be 
emphasized to a point where local damage results. The decidedly 
beneficial character of the food habits of one, two, or sometimes 
three broods of nestlings, numbering 4 to 6 to the nest, adds mate- 
rially to the favorable economic status of the species. 

RELATION TO OTHER SPECIES. 

While the advent of the starling doubtless has had some effect 
on native species nesting in the dooryard, it is not believed this 
bird will jeopardize any species as a whole. EconomicaUy con- 
sidered, the starling is the superior of either the flicker, the robin, 
or the English sparrow, three of the species with which it comes in 
contact in its breeding operations. The eggs and young of bluebirds 
and wrens may be protected by the use of nest boxes with circular 
openings 1^ inches or less in diameter. This leaves the purple 
martin the only species readily subject to attack by the starling, 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STARLING. 59 

whose economic worth may be considered greater than that of the 
latter, but in no case was the distm'bance of a well-estabhshed 
colony of martins noted. In its search for food the starling also 
comes in competition with neighboring species, most of which, 
however, are the starling's economic inferior. The meadowlark 
appears to be the only species which might be affected by this 
competition for food whose added difficulty in sustaining itself is to 
be deplored. 

ROOSTS. 

The objectionable habit possessed by the starling in common 
with several other species, particularly grackles and robins, of 
congregating in enormous roosts, usually in the residential section 
of a city, is, next to the damage resulting from the bird's food habits, 
the source of the greatest economic loss. The persistent use of 
firearms or Roman candles will remove these nuisances, but vigilance 
must be employed to prevent the reestablishing of the roosts in other 
places where they would be equally objectionable. 

CONCLUSION. 

It has been the pm*pose of this investigation to determine what 
should be our attitude toward the starling, in order that a correct 
judgment might be reflected by legislation governing the protection 
of the bird. Most of the starling's food habits have been demon- 
strated to be either beneficial to man or of a neutral' character. 
Furthermore, it has been found that the time the bird spends in 
destroying crops or in molesting other birds is extremely short 
compared with the endless hom's it spends searching for insects or 
feeding on wild fruits. Nevertheless, no policy would be sound which 
would give the bird absolute protection and afford no relief to the 
farmer whose crops are threatened by a local overabundance of 
the species. Consequently, the enactment of laws that afford 
protection to the starling, except when it is actually doing or 
tlu'eatening to inflict damage, appeal's to be the wisest procediu"e. 
With its ready ability to adapt itself to new environments, the 
starling possesses almost unlimited capacity for good, but it is 
potentiaUy harmful in that its gregarious habits may abnormally 
emphasize some minor food habit which would be indulged in at 
the expense of growing crops. The individual farmer will be weU 
rewarded by allowing a reasonable number of starlings to conduct 
their nestmg operations on the farm. Later in the season a little 
vigilance will prevent these easily frightened birds from exacting an 
unfair toll for services rendered. 



60 



BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Table IV. — List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found. ^ 



ANIMAL MATTER. 



COLEOPTEEA (GENUINA) (BEETLES). 

Unidentified adults 

Unidentified larv;u 

Cicindelidsc (tiger beetles): 

Cicindela purpurea 

Cicindela repanda 

Cicindela punctulata 

Cicindela sp 

Cicindela sp. , larvaj 

Carabidje (ground beetles): 

Unidentified 

Unidentified larvae 

Omophrbn americanum 

Carabus sylvosus 

Carabus serratus 

Carabus vinctus 

Carabus nemoralis 

Carabus sp 

Calosoma sayi 

Calosoma calidum. 

Calosoma sp 

Elaphrus fuliginosus 

Elaphrus sp 

Scarites subterraneus 

Scarites sp 

Bembidium versicolor 

Bembidium quadrimaculatum 

Bembidium sp 

Patrobus longicornis 

Pterostichus sayi 

Pterostichus lucublandus 

Pterostichus patruelis 

Pterostichus sp 

Evarthrus sigillatus 

Evarthrus sp 

Amara avida 

Amara pennsylvanica 

Amara impuncticollis 

Amara basillaris 

Amara fallax 

Amara musculus 

Amara sp 

DicEelus elongatiis 

Dicaelus sp 

Platynus cupripemiis 

Platynus nutans 

Platynus placidus 

Platynus crenistriatus 

Platynus sp 

Casnonia pennsylvanica 

Casnonia sp 

Galerita janus 

Galerita sp 

Lebia grandis 

Lebia sp 

Cymindis pilosa 

Cymindis sp 

Chlaenius tricolor 

Chlaenius tomentosus 

Chlaenius sp 

Anomoglossus emarginatus 

1 A total of at least 494 specifically different 



106 
137 

1 
1 
9 
20 
1 

729 
3 
1 
1 
4 

12 
2 

11 
1 

19 
8 
1 
1 

22 
2 
2 
1 
3 
2 
4 
121 
2 

83 
3 
2 
3 

21 
1 
3 
1 
2 
131 
1 

20 

46 
1 
1 
9 

15 

38 

32 
1 
4 
1 
1 



2 

72 

103 
1 



CoLEOPTERA — Continued. 



Carabida;— Continued. 

Cratacanthus dubius 11 

Agonoderus pallipes 3 

Agonoderus testaceus 1 

Agonoderus sp 5 

Harpalus diclirous 1 

Harpalus erraticus 1 

Harpalus caliginosus 144 

Harpalus faunus 9 

Harpalus pennsylvanicus 82 

Harpalus compar 18 

Harpalus er j'thropus 6 

Harpalus herbivagus 2 

Harpalus sp 318 

Selenophorus pedicularius 1 

Stenolophus conjunctus 5 

Stenolophus sp 2 

Anisodactylus rusticus 89 

Anisodactylus carbonarius 1 

Anisodactylus baltimorensis 3 

Anisodactylus lugubris 1 

Anisodactylus sp 224 

Dytiscida? (predacious diving beetles): 

Agabus disintegratus 1 

Hydropliilid;e (water scavenger beetles): 

Tropisternus glaber 2 

Tropisternus sp. . r. 1 

Pliilhydrus sp 1 

Sphacridium scarabasoides 21 

Cercyon unipunctatum 1 

Cercyon sp 1 

Cryptopleurimi minutum 1 

Silphidfe (carrion beetles): 

Unidentified 1 

Necrophorus sp 3 

Silpha surinamensis 1 

Silpha noveboracensis 3 

Silpha americana 1 

Silpha sp 4 

Stapliylinidfe (rove beetles): 

Unidentified 155 

Quedius molochinus 1 

Staphylinus maculosus 29 

Staphylinus mysticus 9 

Staphylinus sp 58 

Philonthus politus 1 

Philonthus hepaticus 1 

Philonthus fusiformis 1 

Philonthus micans 1 

Philonthus sp 14 

Stenus sp 3 

Cryptobium sp 2 

Hesperobium sp 1 

Pfederus littorarius 2 

Scaphidiidre (shining fungus beetles): 

Ba'ocera sp 1 

Coccinellidfe (ladybugs): 

Unidentified adults 18 

Unidentified larva? 1 

Mosilla maculata 5 



food items have been found in the food of the starling. 



ECONOMTC VALUE OF THE STx\RLING. 



61 



Table IV. — List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found — Continued. 

ANIMAL MATTER— Continued. 



CoLEOPTERA— Continued. 

Cocciiiellidae —Continued. 

Hippodamia convergens 

Hippodamia 13-punctata 

Hippodamia parenthesis 

Hippodamia sp 

Coccinella 9-notata 

Coccinellasp 

Adalia bipunctata 

Scyniniis americanus 

Erotylidfe (banded fimgus beetles): 

Languria mozardi 

Cucujidae (flat bark beetles): 

Silvaniis surinamensis 

Histeridfe (shining carrion beetles): 

Unidentified 

Hister biplagiatus 

Hister harrisii * 

Hister interruptus var. immunis 

Hister abbreviatus 

Hister americanus 

Hister perplexiis 

Hister subrotundus 

Hister sp 

Nitidulidae (sap-feeding beetles): 

Ips quadriguttatus 

Trogositidce (grain and bark-gnawing beetles): 

Teuebrioides corticalis 

Tenebrioides sp 

ByrrhidiK (pill beetles): 

Unidentified 

Cy tilus sericeus 

Cytilus sp , 

Byrrhus sp 

Heteroceridfe (mud beetles): 

Heterocerus sp , 

Elateridffi (click beetles): 

Unidentified adults 

Unidentified larvae 

Adelocera discoideOc 

Cryploliypniis abbreviatus 

Monocrepidius lividus 

Monocrepidius vespertinus 

Monocrepidius auritus 

Mouocrepidius bellus-. 

Monocrepidius sp 

Drasterius elegans - - 

Drasterius sp 

Agriotes mancus 

Agriotes pubescens 

Agriotes sp 

Meianotus sp 

Limonius griseus '. 

Limonius interstitialis 

Limonius plebejus 

Limonius sp 

Corymbites pyrrhos 

Asaphes memuoniiis 

Buprestida; (metallic wood-borers); 

Unidentified 

Diccrca obscura 

Diccrca lurida 



303 

29 

1 

2 

2 

9 

3 

13 

11 

17 

12 

4 

1 

1 

5 

10 

1 

2 

1 
1 

2 
1 
1 



CoLEOPTEBA— Continued. 

Lampyridae (fireflies): 

Unidentified adults 11 

Unidentified larvfe 6 

Chauliognathus pennsylvanicus 13 

Chauliognathus marginatus 12 

Chauliognathus sp 2 

Telephorus carolinus 4 

Telephorus bilLneatus 4 

Telephorus sp 5 

Polemius sp 1 

Cleridae (checkered beetles): 

Chariessapilosa 1 

Scarabajidso (lamellicorn beetles): 

Unidentified adults 104 

Unidentified larvae 34 

Canthon Isevis 2 

Canthon sp 2 

Copris minutus 1 

Copris tuUius 6 

Copris sp 1 

Onthophagus nucliicornis 9 

Onthophagus hecate 9 

Onthophagus pennsylvanicus 6 

Onthophagus sp 6 

Ataeuius cognatus 19 

Ataenius sp 8 

Aphodius fossor 9 

Aphodius iimetarius 106 

Aphodius granarius 9 

Aphodius inquinatus 16 

Aphodius stercorosus 1 

Aphodius sp 25 

Bolbocerosoma farctum 2 

Odontaeus cornigerus 1 

Gecftnipes splendidus 2 

G eotnipes sp 1 

Dichelonycha elongata 1 

Serica vespertina 2 

Serica sp 1 

Diplotaxis atlantis 9 

Diplotaxis sp 13 

Phyllophaga ephilida 1 

Phyllophaga fusca 30 

Phyllophaga anxia 10 

Phyllophaga gibbosa 13 

Phyllophaga micans 4 

Phyllophaga fervida 3 

Phyllophaga fraterna 6 

Phyllophaga hirticula 55 

Phyllophaga forsteri 10 

Phyllophaga crenulata 3 

Phyllophaga tristis 41 

i'hyllophaga sp 162 

Anomala lucicola 7 

Anomala sp 31 

Cotaipa lanigera 6 

Dyscinetus trachypygus 1 

Ligyrus gibbosus 10 

Ligyrussp 2 

Euphoria fulgida 1 

Euphoria inda 12 

Euphoria sp 8 



62 



BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Table IV. — List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found — Continued. 



ANIMAL MATTER— Continued. 



CoLEOPTERA— Continued. 

CerambycidEe (long-lioraed beetles): 

Unidentified 9 

Phymatodes variabi.is 1 

Monohammus scutellatus 1 

Lepturges querci 1 

Tetraopes canteriator 1 

Tetraopes sp 1 

ChrysomelidiB (leaf beetles): 

Unidentifled 311 

Douacia sp 1 

Lema trilineaiu 2 

Crioceris asparagi 1 

Chlamys plicata 6 

Chlamys sp 1 

Bassareus sp 1 

Cryptoceplialus venustus 8 

Cryptocephalus calidus 2 

Cryptoceplialus sp 6 

Pachybrachys m-nigrum 1 

Pachybracliys sp 3 

Diachus auratus 1 

TyiJopliorus canellus 3 

Typopliorus quadiunotatus 8 

Typophorus aterrimus 2 

Typophorus gilvlpes 1 

Tj-pophorus sp 27 

Graphops pubesceus 3 

Graphops marcassitus 3 

Graphops sp 4 

Colaspis brunnea - 52 

Colaspis sp 31 

Nodonota tristis 1 

Nodonota pimcticollis 7 

Nodonota cl}T)ealis 1 

Nodonota sp 12 

Labidomera cllvicollis 1 

Leptinotarsa 10-lineata 39 

Zygogiamina suturalis 17 

Zygogramma sp 3 

Calligrapha similiti 10 

Calligrapha elegans 7 

Calligrapha lunata 2 

Calligiapha sp 7 

Plagiodera viridis 2 

Gastroidea polygoni 2 

Gastroidca sp 1 

Phyllobrotica sp 1 

Diabrotica 12-puiictata 3 

Diabrotica vittata 1 

Diabrotica sp 2 

Trirhabda canadensis 2 

Trirhabda sp 1 

Galerucella amerieana 10 

Galerucella sp 63 

Monoxia pimcticollis 2 

Oedionychis vians 2 

OedionycMs thoracica 2 

Oedionychis flmbriata 5 

Disonycha crcnicollis 1 

Disonycha caroliniana 1 

Disonycha triangularis 1 

Disonycha xanthomelaena 2 



CoLEOPTERA— Continued. 

ChrysomeUdse— Continued . 

Disonycha sp ,2 

Haltica ignita 5 

Haltica rufa 1 

Haltica sp 1 

Systena hudsonias 7 

Systena sp 3 

Phyllotreta vittata 1 

Phyllotreta armoraciae . . 1 

Chaotocnema denticulata 13 

Chaetocncma minuta 1 

Chaotocnema sp 20 

Dibolia borealis 1 

Microrhopala vittata 35 

Microrhopala xerene 2 

Microrhopala sp 43 

Coptocycla bicolor 1 

Coptocycla plicata .♦ 1 

Coptocycla sp : 4 

Chelymorpha argus 16 

Tenebrionidce (darkling beetles): 

Unidentifled 10 

Tenebrio obscurus 1 

Opatrinus notus 106 

Blapstinus moestus 1 

Blapstinus metallicus 1 

Blapstinus sp 31 

Helops aereus 1 

Anthicidfe (antliije flower beetles;: 

Unidentified 1 

Moloidse (blister beetles): 

Unidentified 2 

Meloe amcricanus 1 

Epicauta pennsylvanica 1 

Rhynchophoea (Weevils): 

Anthribidse (fungus weevils): 

Euparius marmoreus 1 

Curculionida3 (curculios, or weevils): 

Unidentified 267 

Epicaerus imbricatus 2 

Phyxclis rigidus. .■ 93 

Otiorhynchus sulcatus 8 

Otiorhynchus ovatus 61 

Otiorhynchus sp 2 

Tanymecus confertus 5 

Barypithes pellucidus 1 

Sitona liispidula 510 

Sitona fiavescens 34 

Sitona sp •. 98 

Hypcra punctata 1244 

Phytonomus meles 3 

Phytonomus nigiirosuib 75 

Phytonomus sp 43 

Listronfftus inaequaiipemiis 1 

Listronotus frontalis 1 

Listronotus sp 1 

Hyperodes sp 37 

Pachylobius picivorus 1 

Lixus sp 2 

Smicronyx comiculatus 1 

Bagous sp 



ECONOMIC VALUE OP THE STARLING. 



63 



Table IV. — List of items identified in the food contaiified in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in ivJdch each tvas found — Continued. 

ANIMAL MATTER— Continued. 



Rhyncuophora— Continued. 

Curculionidae— Continued. 

Conotrachelus sp 1 

Acalles sp 1 

Tyloderma foveolatum 2 

Tyloderma acrea 4 

Tyloderma sp 2 

Cryptorhynchus obliquus 1 

CryptorhjTichus fallax 1 

Cryptorhynchus tristis 1 

CryptorhjTichus sp 1 

Ceutorhynchus sp 1 

Rhinoncus p>Trhopus 19 

Rhinoncus longulus 1 

Rhinoncus sp 4 

Sphenophorus inaequahs 5 

Sphenophorus p?rtinax 1 

Sphenopliorus costipennis 1 

Sphenophorus melanocephalus 1 

Sphenophorus parvulus 110 

Sphenophorus zeae 26 

Sphenophorus sp 117 

Hymenoptera (Ants, Bees, and Wasps.) 

Unidentified liymenopterans 172 

Hymenopterous cocoons 4 

Tentlircdinoidea (sawfhes): 

Unidentified adults 

Unidentified larvae 

Arge dulciaria 

Schizocerus zabriskiei 

Xipliydria maculata 

Ichneumonoidea (parasitic wasps): 

Unidentified 

Braconid (unidentified) 

Apanteles torbesi 

Meteorus sp 

Chelonella sp 

Aleiodes intermedius 

Aleiodes sp 

Capitonius sp 

Cymodusa distincta 

Paniscus geminatus 

Therion morio 

Homoptropus sp 

Scambus sp 

Pimplidia pedalis 

Pimplidia sp 

Itopleetis conquisitor 

Rhyssa sp 

Arotes amoenus 

Itamoplex limatus 2 

Itamoplex sp 5 

Gambrus sp 1 

Phygadeuon sp 3 

Hemiteles sp 4 

Phaeogenes sp 19 

Amblyteles sp ... 1 

Cratichncumon sp 24 

Pterocormus seminiger 1 

Pterocornius sp 19 

Pseudamblyteles suturalid. ........... . 1 

Pseudamblyteles sp 1 



HvMENOPTER.v— Continued. 

CjTiipoidea (galhlies): 

Figites sp 3 

Formicoidea (ants): 

Unidentified 374 

Crematogaster lineolata 2 

Aphaenogastor maria; 1 

Aphaenogaster I'ul va subsp 11 

Aphaenogaster fulva aquia 4 

Aphaenogaster sp 44 

Myrmica punctiventrib 1 

Myrmica rubra scabrinodis 115 

Myrmica sp 45 

Lasius niger americanus 12 

Lasius niger neoniger 2 

Lasius umbratus mixtus 2 

Lasius umliratus mixtus apliidieola 2 

Lasius clavlger 2 

Lasius latipes 1 

Lasius sp 11 

Formica truncicola Integra 1 

Formica pallidc-fulva 4 

Formica pallide-fulva var. schaufussi 37 

Formica f usca subsericea 62 

Formica sp 39 

Camponotus herculeanus penasylvauicus. . 34 

Camponotus sp 27 

Chrysidoidea (cuckoo wasps): 

Clirysis caerulans 1 

Holopygasp 2 

Vespoidea (wasps): 

Unidentified 2 

Gonatopus sp 1 

Tipliia waldeni 1 

Tiphia inomata 2 

Tiphia egregia 1 

Tiphia transversa 1 

Tipliia sp 22 

Mutillid 1 

Psammochares sp 3 

Odynerus sp 1 

Vespula maculata 1 

Vespula \iilgaris 2 

Vespula marginata 1 

PoUstes pallipes 4 

Sphecoidea (wasps): 

Didineis texaua 1 

Cerceris sp 2 

Halictus lerou.xi 2 

Ilalictus sp 1 

Chloralictus pilosus 4 

Chloralictus zephyrus 2 

Chloralictus obscurus 1 

Chloralictus sp 13 

Augoclilora confusci 1 

Augochlora sp 1 

Sphecodes sp 1 

Ptilandrena krigianii 1 

Andrena bruimiventris rhodura 3 

Andrena forbesi 1 

Andrena frigida 1 

Andrena sp 4 

Osmia sp 1 



64 



BULLETIN 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Tabi.e IV. — List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found — Continued. 



ANIMAL MATTER— Continued. 



Hemiptera (True Bugs). 

Unidentified bugs 92 

Cydnidfe (negro bugs): 

Thyreocoris ater 1 

Thyreocoris unicolor 1 

Thyreocoris sp 8 

Amnestus spinifrons 2 

Pentatomidae (stinkbugs): 

Unidentified 320 

Podops cinctipes 1 

Brocliymena sp 3 

Mormidea lugens 1 

Euscliistus servus 1 

Euschistus euscliistoides 1 

Euscliistus variolarius 7 

Euschistus sp s) 

Coenus delius 32 

Thyanta custator 1 

Acrosternum hilaris ... '. 1 

Stiretrus anchorago 1 

Mtneus strigipes 1 

Podisus maculiventris 1 

Coreidoe (squasli bugs): 

Unidentified 3 

Anasa tristis 1 

Anasa repetita 1 

Alydus eurinus — 3 

Alydus sp 2 

LygaeidaB (chinchbugs): 

Unidentified 39 

Bhssus leucopterus 5 

Istlimocoris piceus 12 

Isthmocoris sp 2 

Phlegyas sp 2 

Myodocha serripes 9 

Ligyrocoris sp 1 

Perigenes sp 1 

Cryphula parallelogramma 1 

Keduviidte (assassin bugs): 

Unidentified 16 

Melanolestes picipes 2 

Melanolestes sp 1 

Acholla multispinosa 2 

Sinea diadoma 6 

Sineasp ■. 4 

NabidiB (damsel bugs): 

Unidentified 14 

Pagasa fusca 8 

Nabis subcoleoptratus 1 

Nabis sp 11 

CimicidiB (bedbugs): 

Cime.xsp 1 

Miridfe (leaf bugs): ^ 

Miris dolobratus 2 

Lygus pratensis 7 

Lygus sp 2 

Neoborus sp 1 

Cicadidffl (cicadas): 

Tibicen sp 1 



Hemiptera— Continued. 

Cercopidte (spittle insects): 

Pliilgenus sp 1 

MembracidiX' (tree hoppers): 

Ceresa diceros 1 

Ceresa sp 1 

Campylenclua latipes 3 

Cicadellidse (leaf hoppers): 

Unidentified 5fi 

Agalha 4-punctata 1 

AgalUa sanguinolenta 2 

Agallia sp ' 1 

Draeculacephala niollipes 1 

Gyponasp 1 

Xerophlnea viridis 1 

Acucephalus albifrons 9 

Deltocephalus sp 2 

Fulgoridae (lanternflies): 

Unidentified 2 

Scolops sp 4 

Acanalonia bivittata 1 

Orthoptera (Grasshoppers, Locusts, Crickets, 
(Etc.). 

Unidentified adults 16 

Unidentified eggs 10 

Forficulida) (earwigs): 

Unidentified 1 

Acrididae (short-horned grasshoppers): 

Unidentified 760 

Nomotettix cristatus 2 

Nomotetttx sp 1 

Tettix arenosus 1 

Tettigidea parvipennis 1 

Tettigidea lateraUs 1 

Tettigidea lateralis var. polymorpha 1 

Tettigidea sp 8 

Orphulella olivacea 1 

Stenobothrus curtipeimis 1 

Arphia sulphurea 1 

Arpliia xanthoptera 1 

Chortophaga viridifasciata 3 

Hippiscus sp 1 

Melanoplus femoratus 2 

Melanoplus femur-rubrum 24 

Melanoplus atlanis 1 

Melanoplus sp 36 

Locustidffi (green grasshoppers): 

Unidentified 54 

Orchelimum sp 2 

Conocephalus sp 4 

Grylhdffi (crickets): 

Unidentified 332 

Gryllotalpa borealis 1 

Nemobius fasciatus vittatus 2 

Nemobius sp 312 

Gryllus peruisylvanicus 4 

Gryllus sp 223 

Miogryllus sp 2 



ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE STAELIXG. 



65 



Table TV.— List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found — Continued. 



ANIMAL MATTER— Continued. 



Lepidoptera (Moths, Butterflies, Cater- 
pillars, Etc.). 

Unidentified 65 

Unidentified eggs 1 

Unidentified caterpillars 812 

Unidentified pupae 20 

Nymphalidse (brush-footed Imtterflies): 

Argynnis cybele (caterpillar) 1 

Arctiidse (tiger moths): 

Unidentified caterpillar 1 

Noctuida; (cutworms): 

Unidentified caterpillars 24 

Nephelodes violans (caterpillar) 1 

Nephelodes minians (caterpillars) 22 

Cucullia asteroides (caterpillars) 2 

Lasiocampidse (tent caterpillars): 

Malacosoma americana (caterpillars) 3 

Malacosoma sp. (caterpillars) 2 

Deilepliila Uneata Ccaterpillar) 1 

DiPTERA (Flies and their Maggots). 

Proctacanthus sp 

Sarcophaga sp 

Phormia terra^-novse 

Musca domestica 

Tipula sp 

Chrysops sp 

Leia sp 



Arachnida (Spiders, Ticks, Etc.). 



Drassus neglectus... 

Pachygnatha sp 

Tetragnatha sp 

Xysticus luctans. . . 
Lycosa caroUnensis. 

Lycosahelluo 

Lycosa punctulata.. 



Myriapoda (Centipedes and Millipeds). 

Diplopoda (millipeds): 

Unidentified 91.3 

Nemasoma minutum 1 

Julus caeruleocinctus 10 

Chilopoda (centipedes): 

Unidentified centipedes 7 

Crustacea (Crustaceans). 

Isopoda (wood lice, etc.): 

Unidentified 15 

Orchestia grillus 1 

Orchestia sp 1 

PorcelUo laevis 2 

PorcelUo sp 1 

ArmadilUdium sp 1 



MoLLUSCA (Snails, Etc.). 

Unidentified mollusks 71 

Nassidfe (basket shells): 

Ilyanassa obsoleta 3 

Zonitidae (glassy snails): 

Zonites arboreus 5 

Gastrodonta suppressa 1 

Testacellidpc (flesh-eating land snails): 

Cochlicopa lubrica 1 

Helicidse (land snails): 

Vallonia sp 11 

Aurieulidse (ear snails): 

Melampus lineatus 28 

Littorinidae (periwinkles): 

Littorina rudis i 

Pupillidffi (chrysalis shells): 

Vertigo ovata 1 



VEGETABLE MATTER. 



Unidentified buds 2 

Unidentified mast 15 

Unidentified vn\d fruit 184 

Vegetable garbage 528 

Vegetable rubbish 21 

Pinacese: 

Juniperus virginiana (red cedar) 13 

Juniperus sp. (juniper) 1 

Graminese: 

Unidentified grass seeds 39 

Andropogon sorghum (sorghimi) 2 

Paniciun miUaceum (millet) 1 

Panicum sp. (switchgrass) 6 

Chsctochloa glauca ( foxtail) 11 

Chiietochloa sp. (foxtail) 13 

Eragrostis sp. (love grass) 1 

Anthoxanthum odoratum (sweet vernal 

grass) 1 

Zea mays (corn) 59 

Triticum vulgare (wheat) 15 

Avena sativa (oats) 6 



Cyperacese: 

Unidentified sedge 4 

Carex sp. (sedge) 6 

Convallariacesp: 

Asparagus officinalis (asparagus) 1 

Smilacese: 

Smilax herbacea (carrion flower) 1 

Smilax sp. (greenbriar) 1 

Myricacese: 

Myrica caroUnensis (bayberry) 122 

Betulacefe: 

Ahius sp. (alder) 1 

Uhnaceae: 

Celtis occidentalis (hackberry) 9 

Moracese: 

Moras alba (white mulberry) — 45 

Morus rabra (red mulberry) 52 

Morus sp. (mulberry) 76 

Polygonacese: 

Ruraex sp. (dock) 8 

Polygonum lapathifolium (smartweed) 1 



66 



BULLETIIS^ 868, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTITRE. 



Table IV. — List of items identified in the food contained in 2,626 starling stomachs 
examined, and the number of stomachs in which each was found — Continued. 

VEGETABLE MATTER— Continued. 



Polygonacese— Continued. 




Fabacese: 




Polvgonum pennsvlvanicum (smart- 




Tri folium sp. (clover) 


3 


weed) 


2 


Robinia pseudacacia (locust) 


2 


Polygonum persicarla (smartweed) 


1 


Anacardiaceae: 




Polvgonum sp. (smartweed) 


1? 


Rhus glabra (smooth sumac) 


32 


Chenopodiaceae: 




Rhus copallina (dwarf sumac) 


1 


1 


Rhus radicans (poison ivy) 


89 


Amaranthacese: 




Rhus vemix (poison oaki 


1 


Amaranthus sp. (amaranth) 


1 


Rhus sp. (sumac) 

Aquifoliacca': 


266 


Aizoacea;: 


1 


Ilex verticillata (black alder).. 


9. 


Mollugo verticillata (Indian chickweed). 


CelastracciT?: 




Phytolaccacese: 




Celastrus scandens (bittersweet).. 


4 


Phytolacca decandra (pokeweed) 


20 


Vitaceae: 




Caryophyllaceae: 




Psedera quinquefolia (Virginia creeper).. 


39 


Silene media (chickweed) . . 


2 


Ampelopsis sp. (?) (ampelopsis) 

Vitis sp. (grape) 


2 


Berberidaceae: 




26 


Berberis vulgaris (barberrjO 


1 


Comaceae: 




Berberis sp. (barberrj') 


3 


Comus florida (flowering dogwood) 


4 


Lauraceae: 




Comus amomum (kimiikimiik) 


1 


Sassafras sassafras (sassafras) 


3 


Comus asperifolia (rough-leaved dog- 
wood) 




BrassicaccEe: 




1 


Brassica sp. (mustard) 


1 


Comus paniculata (pahicled dogwood) . . 


1 


Grossulariacese: 




Comus sp. (dogwood) 


3 


Ribes sp. (currant) 


1 


Nyssa sylvatica (sour gum) 


44 


Rosaceae: 




Ericaceae: 




Fragaria sp. (strawberry) 


8 


Gaylussacia frondosa (huckleberry) 


1 


Rubus sp. (blackberry) 


27 


Gaylussacia baccata (huckleberry) 


3 


Malaceae: 




Gaylussacia sp. (huckleberry) 


3 


Sorbus sp. (mountain ash) . . 


1 


Vaccinium sp. (blueberry). . .. 


5 


Amelanchier sp. (June berry) 


2 


Solanaceae: 




Malus sp. (cultivated apple) 


45 


Solanum sp. (nightshade) 


4 


Pyrus sp. (cultivated pear) 


3 


Plantaginaceac: 




Amvgdalaceie: 




Plantago lanceolata (ribgrass) ... 


1 


Prmaus scrotina (wild black cherry) 


207 


Plantago sp. (plantain) 


6 


Prunus virginiana (chokecherry) 


IS 


Caprifoliaceac: 




Primus maritima (beach plum) 


1 


Viburnum sj). (arrowwood) 


19 


Prunus sp. (cultivated cherry) 


46^1 




148 


Prunus sp. (wild cherrv^) 


62 


CompositfP: 




Cassiaeeee: 




Ambrosia artemisii folia (ragweed) ... 


29 


Gleditsia triacanthos (honey locust) 


1 


Taraxacum taraxacum (dandelion) 


4 



PUBLICATIONS OF THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RELATING 
TO THE FOOD HABITS OF WILD BIRDS. 



AVAILABLE FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION BY THE DEPARTMENT. 

The English Sparrow as a Pest. (Farmers' Bulletin 493.) 

Some Common Game, Aquatic, and Rapacious Birds in Relation to Man. (Farmers' 

Bulletin 497.) 
Food of Some Well-known Birds of Forest, Farm, and Garden. (Farmers' Bulletin 

506.) 
Some Common Bh'ds Useful to the Farmer. (Farmers' Bulletin G30.) 
Common Birds of Southeastern United States in Relation to Agriculture. (Farmers' 

Bulletin 755.) 
The Crow in Its Relation to Agriculture. (Farmers' Bulletin 1102.) 
Propagation of Wild-duck Foods. (Department Bulletin 4()5.) 
The Crow and Its Relation to Man. (Department Bulletin 621.) 
Food Habits of Seven Specie^of American Shoal- water Ducks. (Department Bulle- 
tin 862.) 

FOR SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, GOVERNMENT PRINTING 
OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C. 

Fifty Common Birds of Farm and Orchard. (P'armers' Bulletin 513, colored plates.) 

Price, 15 cents. 
Birds in Relation to the Alfalfa Weevil. (Department Bulletin 107.) Price, 15 cents. 
Eleven Important AVild-duck Foods. (Dei^artment Bulletin 205.) Price, 5 cents. 
Food Habits of the Thrushes of the United States. (Department Bulletin 280.) 

Price, 5 cents. 
Bii'ds of Porto Rico. (Department Bulletin 32(i.) Price, 30 cents. 
Food Habits of the Swallows. (Department Bulletin 619.) Price 5 cents. 
Food Habits of the Mallard Ducks of the United States. (Department Bulletin 720.) 

Price, 5 cents. . 
Waterfowl and Their Food Plants in Sandhill Region of Nebraska: Pt. 1, Waterfowl 

in Nebraska; pt. 2, Wild-duck foods of the Sandhill Region of Nebraska. (Depart- 
ment Bulletin 794.) Price, 15 cents. 
The Relation of Sparrows to Agriculture. (Biological Survey Bulletin 15.) Price, 

10 cents. 
Birds of a Maryland Farm. (Biological Survey Bulletin 17.) Price, 20 cents. 
The Bobwhite and C)ther Quails of the United States in Their Economic Relations. 

(Biological Survey Bulletin 21.) Price, 15 cents. 
The Horned Larks and Their Relation to Agriculture. (Biological Survey Bulletin 

23.) Price, 5 cents. 
Food Habits of the Cxrosbeaks. (Biological Survey Bulletin 32.) Price, 25 cents. 
Birds of California in Relation to the Fruit Industry. (Biological Survey Bulletin 34, 

Pt. 2.) Price, 40 cents. 
Food of the Woodpeckers of the United States. (Biological Survey Bulletin 37.) 

Price, 35 cents. 
Woodpeckers in Relation to Trees and Wood Products. (Biological Survey Bulletin 

39.) Price, 30 cents. 
Index to Papers Relating to the Food of Birds. (Biological Survey Bulletin 43.) 

Price,. 10 cents. 
Food of Our More Important Flycatchers. (Biological Survey Bulletin 44.) Price, 

20 cents. 
Hawks and Owls from the Standpoint of the Farmer. (Biological Survey Circular 61.) 

Price, 5 cents. 
Destruction of the Cotton Boll Wee\dl by Birds in Winter. (Biological Survey Cir- 
cular 64.) Price, 5 cents. 



ADDITIONAL COPIES 

OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM 

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

AT 

25 CENTS PER COPY 
A 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



